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.
-0.34%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
105.72%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x MAXN's 73.39%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
57.70%
EBIT growth 75-90% of MAXN's 71.83%. Bill Ackman would push for cost reforms or better product mix to narrow the gap.
46.08%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of MAXN's 66.50%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
30.28%
Net income growth under 50% of MAXN's 73.10%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
30.93%
EPS growth of 30.93% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
30.93%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of MAXN's 73.09%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.39%
Share change of 0.39% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.39%
Diluted share change of 0.39% 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.
-27.51%
Negative OCF growth while MAXN is at 93.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-15.58%
Negative FCF growth while MAXN is at 91.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
1.68%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-53.23%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-39.91%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MAXN stands at 7.06%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-1801.75%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-208.25%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-14.01%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-845.00%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
5.36%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-718.62%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-38.05%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-45.43%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-48.50%
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.
5.87%
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.
3.93%
We show growth while MAXN is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.70%
Positive asset growth while MAXN is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-5.90%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-9.60%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-3.71%
Our R&D shrinks while MAXN invests at 3.39%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.93%
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.