PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.52 - 1.58
1.19 - 3.37
354.5K / 984.1K (Avg.)
-1.64 | -0.94
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
14.60%
Positive revenue growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-4711.83%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-274.31%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-256.54%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-285.53%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-281.93%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-281.93%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.51%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.22%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.51%
Slight or no buyback while FSLR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
47.66%
OCF growth under 50% of FSLR's 385.17%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
42.53%
FCF growth 50-75% of FSLR's 70.51%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
-33.88%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-33.15%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
12.39%
Positive 3Y CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-329.39%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 66.25%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-58.31%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
45.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 826.81%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-908.65%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-2061.24%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-6649.94%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-97.97%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while FSLR stands at 211.55%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-96.88%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 4.68%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-97.83%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.38%
Our AR growth while FSLR is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
3.89%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. FSLR's 28.05%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-18.85%
Negative asset growth while FSLR invests at 2.71%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-75.77%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-16.71%
We’re deleveraging while FSLR stands at 4.21%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
65.82%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. FSLR's 0.23%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-0.34%
We cut SG&A while FSLR invests at 23.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.