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.
-26.65%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-42.24%
Negative gross profit growth while MAXN is at 73.39%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-90.10%
Negative EBIT growth while MAXN is at 71.83%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-90.68%
Negative operating income growth while MAXN is at 66.50%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-78.32%
Negative net income growth while MAXN stands at 73.10%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-79.25%
Negative EPS growth while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-78.57%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MAXN is at 73.09%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
6.18%
Share change of 6.18% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
-2.56%
Reduced diluted shares while MAXN is at 0.00%. 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.
-361.62%
Negative OCF growth while MAXN is at 93.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-675.31%
Negative FCF growth while MAXN is at 91.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
320.41%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
19.51%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-35.46%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MAXN stands at 7.06%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-194.25%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-3372.51%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
6.13%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
130.22%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-31.05%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
107.18%
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.
-28.04%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-31.98%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
74.34%
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.
-1.99%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
12.95%
Positive asset growth while MAXN is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
8.74%
Positive BV/share change while MAXN is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
19.49%
We have some new debt while MAXN reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.99%
Our R&D shrinks while MAXN invests at 3.39%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-3.29%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.