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.
24.38%
Positive revenue growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
102.35%
Positive gross profit growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
186.59%
Positive EBIT growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
1259.49%
Positive operating income growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
824.29%
Positive net income growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
830.77%
Positive EPS growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
766.67%
Positive diluted EPS growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.09%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.01%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.81%
Diluted share count expanding well above FSLR's 0.18%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
134.63%
Positive OCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
125.80%
Positive FCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-79.51%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-27.17%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-57.44%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 77.03%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-96.52%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
104.06%
Below 50% of FSLR's 235.75%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-74.13%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
52.21%
Positive 10Y CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
357.82%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
159.44%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x FSLR's 126.37%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
-86.30%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while FSLR stands at 28.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-77.75%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
131.73%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FSLR's 6.72%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while FSLR invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-12.53%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
18.21%
We show growth while FSLR is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
13.60%
Asset growth above 1.5x FSLR's 1.77%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
5847.50%
BV/share growth above 1.5x FSLR's 2.30%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-26.60%
We’re deleveraging while FSLR stands at 7.04%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-38.72%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
48.07%
SG&A growth well above FSLR's 25.75%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.