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.
25.29%
Revenue growth similar to MAXN's 27.23%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
153.10%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x MAXN's 105.52%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
260.81%
EBIT growth above 1.5x MAXN's 48.32%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
156.30%
Operating income growth above 1.5x MAXN's 48.32%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
235.37%
Net income growth above 1.5x MAXN's 39.17%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
234.92%
EPS growth above 1.5x MAXN's 39.00%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
219.05%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x MAXN's 39.00%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.53%
Share change of 0.53% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
17.72%
Diluted share change of 17.72% 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.
45.61%
Positive OCF growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
40.80%
Positive FCF growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-6.51%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while MAXN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-21.77%
Negative 5Y CAGR while MAXN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
0.57%
3Y CAGR of 0.57% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
-1929.57%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while MAXN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
44.09%
OCF/share CAGR of 44.09% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
73.82%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 73.82% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
440.85%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 440.85% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
684.37%
Net income/share CAGR of 684.37% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
268.19%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 268.19% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
-107.70%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while MAXN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-110.70%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-111.80%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
21.68%
AR growth of 21.68% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
4.84%
Inventory growth of 4.84% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
-15.98%
Negative asset growth while MAXN invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
56.59%
BV/share growth of 56.59% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
6.34%
Debt growth of 6.34% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
21.12%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. MAXN's 31.18%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-1.40%
We cut SG&A while MAXN invests at 19.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.