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.
48.13%
Positive revenue growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
268.96%
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.
22.43%
EBIT growth below 50% of MAXN's 71.83%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
7.68%
Operating income growth under 50% of MAXN's 66.50%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
42.14%
Net income growth at 50-75% of MAXN's 73.10%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
41.79%
EPS growth of 41.79% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
41.79%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of MAXN's 73.09%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
0.05%
Share change of 0.05% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
0.05%
Diluted share change of 0.05% 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.
83.55%
OCF growth at 75-90% of MAXN's 93.92%. Bill Ackman would demand better working capital management or cost discipline.
54.77%
FCF growth 50-75% of MAXN's 91.23%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
15.45%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-36.17%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-31.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MAXN stands at 7.06%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-6.52%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
28.49%
Positive OCF/share growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
22.80%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-458.30%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
4.71%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-259.26%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-53.50%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-46.51%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-52.35%
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.
3.82%
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.
-8.26%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.10%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-2.89%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
18.11%
We have some new debt while MAXN reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
4.75%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MAXN's 3.39%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-0.44%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.