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.
31.20%
Positive revenue growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-78.20%
Negative gross profit growth while MAXN is at 73.39%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-1010.38%
Negative EBIT growth while MAXN is at 71.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-7584.19%
Negative operating income growth while MAXN is at 66.50%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-6871.81%
Negative net income growth while MAXN stands at 73.10%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-6763.64%
Negative EPS growth while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-6763.64%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MAXN is at 73.09%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
1.25%
Share change of 1.25% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
1.25%
Diluted share change of 1.25% 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.
39.38%
OCF growth under 50% of MAXN's 93.92%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
41.08%
FCF growth under 50% of MAXN's 91.23%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
551.36%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
610.09%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
25.83%
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.
-200.41%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-1610.30%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-387.08%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-320.95%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-1901.08%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-485.94%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
110.96%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
25.32%
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.
58.28%
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.
-15.35%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.92%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-9.42%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-4.16%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
11.79%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MAXN's 3.39%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
33.38%
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.