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.
-10.36%
Negative revenue growth while FSLR stands at 31.87%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-33.63%
Negative gross profit growth while FSLR is at 15.58%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-110.42%
Negative EBIT growth while FSLR is at 336.78%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-105.75%
Negative operating income growth while FSLR is at 336.78%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-111.73%
Negative net income growth while FSLR stands at 81.21%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-111.98%
Negative EPS growth while FSLR is at 81.65%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-113.46%
Negative diluted EPS growth while FSLR is at 81.48%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.55%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.11%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-14.46%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-367.05%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-441.53%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-61.76%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 13.90%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-36.20%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-35.97%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 39.57%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
86.97%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
91.25%
Positive OCF/share growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
85.82%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-1185.23%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while FSLR is at 45.41%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
54.60%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x FSLR's 18.02%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
65.83%
Below 50% of FSLR's 149.10%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
-87.55%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while FSLR stands at 28.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-78.76%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-38.27%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 8.78%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
7.32%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. FSLR's 179.39%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
9.55%
We show growth while FSLR is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-3.14%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-11.71%
We have a declining book value while FSLR shows 3.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
4.40%
We have some new debt while FSLR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
53.13%
We increase R&D while FSLR cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-9.08%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.