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.
19.27%
Revenue growth above 1.5x MAXN's 6.72%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
12.71%
Positive gross profit growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-233.84%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-90.19%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-91.84%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-89.47%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-89.47%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.33%
Share count expansion well above MAXN's 0.50%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.33%
Diluted share count expanding well above MAXN's 0.50%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
48.66%
Positive OCF growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
41.15%
Positive FCF growth while MAXN is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-52.25%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
2.11%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-21.57%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
14.74%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of MAXN's 67.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
72.34%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to MAXN's 67.91%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
43.59%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of MAXN's 67.91%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
48.93%
Positive 10Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
46.04%
Positive 5Y CAGR while MAXN is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-142.56%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-75.77%
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.
-55.61%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while MAXN is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
313.59%
Equity/share CAGR of 313.59% while MAXN is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
15.84%
AR growth well above MAXN's 10.65%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-9.40%
Inventory is declining while MAXN stands at 13.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-2.18%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
16.14%
Positive BV/share change while MAXN is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1.70%
Debt growth far above MAXN's 1.43%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
47.80%
We increase R&D while MAXN cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
20.84%
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.