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.
19.48%
Positive revenue growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
32.65%
Gross profit growth under 50% of MAXN's 73.39%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
66.29%
EBIT growth similar to MAXN's 71.83%. Walter Schloss might infer both firms share similar operational efficiencies.
66.29%
Operating income growth similar to MAXN's 66.50%. Walter Schloss would assume both share comparable operational structures.
77.71%
Net income growth comparable to MAXN's 73.10%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
75.00%
EPS growth of 75.00% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
62.50%
Diluted EPS growth at 75-90% of MAXN's 73.09%. Bill Ackman would expect further improvements in net income or share count reduction.
7.66%
Share change of 7.66% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
6.47%
Diluted share change of 6.47% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
44.62%
OCF growth under 50% of MAXN's 93.92%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
-188.13%
Negative FCF growth while MAXN is at 91.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
28.93%
Our AR growth while MAXN is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
20.88%
We show growth while MAXN is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
4.08%
Positive asset growth while MAXN is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-4.55%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.01%
Our R&D shrinks while MAXN invests at 3.39%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
24.49%
We expand SG&A while MAXN cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.