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.
-2.89%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-32.38%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-64.37%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-67.05%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-79.39%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-79.78%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-79.45%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.12%
Share reduction more than 1.5x FSLR's 0.76%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-1.65%
Reduced diluted shares while FSLR is at 0.88%. 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.
13.88%
Positive OCF growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-323.16%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
6445.22%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of FSLR's 9773.22%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
5.50%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 42.83%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
-46.37%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 7.54%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
1256.12%
OCF/share CAGR of 1256.12% while FSLR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
-52.33%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-89.41%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
229.38%
Below 50% of FSLR's 775.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-49.88%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-88.45%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-27.56%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 139.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-46.96%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 11.23%. 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.
-12.14%
Firm’s AR is declining while FSLR shows 12.52%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-14.75%
Inventory is declining while FSLR stands at 15.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.71%
Asset growth above 1.5x FSLR's 0.30%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
3.92%
BV/share growth above 1.5x FSLR's 1.13%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
0.30%
We have some new debt while FSLR reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
13.88%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. FSLR's 9.82%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
20.40%
SG&A growth well above FSLR's 2.80%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.