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.
9.09%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x MAXN's 6.24%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
143.69%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x MAXN's 87.72%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-80.46%
Negative EBIT growth while MAXN is at 11.81%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-129.88%
Negative operating income growth while MAXN is at 11.81%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-112.36%
Negative net income growth while MAXN stands at 17.53%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-112.94%
Negative EPS growth while MAXN is at 17.69%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-114.67%
Negative diluted EPS growth while MAXN is at 17.69%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.06%
Share change of 0.06% while MAXN is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
-14.56%
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.
55.50%
OCF growth under 50% of MAXN's 135.62%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
28.19%
FCF growth under 50% of MAXN's 82.69%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-32.22%
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.
-33.90%
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.
-36.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while MAXN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-130.37%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while MAXN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-2.41%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
72.75%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 72.75% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
-151.13%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-143.15%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while MAXN is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
64.09%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 64.09% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
-108.18%
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.
-111.06%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-112.67%
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.
9.41%
AR growth of 9.41% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
10.82%
Inventory growth of 10.82% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
-2.54%
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.
-65.72%
We have a declining book value while MAXN shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-2.89%
We’re deleveraging while MAXN stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-11.33%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
4.45%
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.