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.
4.76%
Positive revenue growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-2.26%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-171.19%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
27.21%
Positive operating income growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-212.19%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-213.95%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-225.64%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.14%
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.
-11.05%
Reduced diluted shares while FSLR is at 0.06%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-207.64%
Negative OCF growth while FSLR is at 72.26%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-221.36%
Negative FCF growth while FSLR is at 62.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-73.93%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-64.53%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-38.36%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-162.53%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 22.36%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
85.23%
Below 50% of FSLR's 491.55%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
88.04%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 233.66%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
87.07%
Positive 10Y CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-66.36%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
23.38%
Positive short-term CAGR while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-82.27%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while FSLR stands at 17.60%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-77.05%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
633.78%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FSLR's 11.14%. 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.90%
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.
2.37%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. FSLR's 7.36%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-7.62%
Negative asset growth while FSLR invests at 0.28%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-17.46%
We have a declining book value while FSLR shows 0.80%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-3.83%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-36.77%
Our R&D shrinks while FSLR invests at 6.23%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-9.80%
We cut SG&A while FSLR invests at 19.62%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.