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.
-4.64%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
103.15%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x MAXN's 73.39%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
81.22%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x MAXN's 71.83%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
82.82%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x MAXN's 66.50%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
79.91%
Net income growth comparable to MAXN's 73.10%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
79.81%
EPS growth of 79.81% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
79.81%
Similar diluted EPS growth to MAXN's 73.09%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.07%
Share change of 0.07% 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.
-32.48%
Negative OCF growth while MAXN is at 93.92%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-24.39%
Negative FCF growth while MAXN is at 91.23%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-35.27%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-43.94%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
9.00%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x MAXN's 7.06%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
-162.65%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-581.92%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-50.61%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-307.66%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-171.29%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-54.33%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-103.20%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-104.46%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-103.54%
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.
5.46%
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.
1.83%
Positive asset growth while MAXN is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-64.84%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
48.51%
We have some new debt while MAXN reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-49.89%
Our R&D shrinks while MAXN invests at 3.39%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
17.32%
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.