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.
17.21%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of FSLR's 33.36%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
-72.55%
Negative gross profit growth while FSLR is at 8.66%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-60.26%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-42.37%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-95.09%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-114.57%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-115.69%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.25%
Slight or no buybacks while FSLR is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.08%
Slight or no buyback while FSLR is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
17.58%
OCF growth under 50% of FSLR's 136.30%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
130.50%
FCF growth 50-75% of FSLR's 212.37%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
7074.36%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSLR's 9715.17%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
7074.36%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSLR's 9715.17%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
409.05%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSLR's 720.67%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
4274.13%
OCF/share CAGR of 4274.13% while FSLR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
4274.13%
OCF/share CAGR of 4274.13% while FSLR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
251.21%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 1993.90%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
107.09%
Below 50% of FSLR's 1847.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
107.09%
Below 50% of FSLR's 1847.34%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-94.13%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSLR is 1088.16%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
95.42%
Below 50% of FSLR's 334.81%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-11.89%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-15.43%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
3.05%
Asset growth well under 50% of FSLR's 8.22%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
1.36%
Under 50% of FSLR's 8.75%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
9.12%
We have some new debt while FSLR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
3.94%
We increase R&D while FSLR cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
35.79%
SG&A declining or stable vs. FSLR's 81.08%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.