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.
-36.46%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
223.64%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MAXN's 73.39%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-156.30%
Negative EBIT growth while MAXN is at 71.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-114.78%
Negative operating income growth while MAXN is at 66.50%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
1213.79%
Net income growth above 1.5x MAXN's 73.10%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
737.25%
EPS growth of 737.25% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
737.25%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MAXN's 73.09%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.26%
Share change of 0.26% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.07%
Diluted share change of 0.07% 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.
-79.62%
Negative OCF growth while MAXN is at 93.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-133.00%
Negative FCF growth while MAXN is at 91.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
15.16%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
15.16%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
89.04%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x MAXN's 7.06%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
103.91%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
103.91%
Positive OCF/share growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
249.97%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
106.39%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
106.39%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
685.68%
Positive short-term CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
73.31%
Positive short-term equity growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
25.27%
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.
24.66%
We show growth while MAXN is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
22.14%
Positive asset growth while MAXN is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
3.16%
Positive BV/share change while MAXN is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
43.80%
We have some new debt while MAXN reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
21.36%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MAXN's 3.39%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.35%
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.