FSLR vs MAXN Stock Comparison
Compare FSLR and MAXN across AIQ Score, fundamentals, valuation, momentum, risk, analyst expectations and current market evidence.
What is the main difference between FSLR and MAXN?
MAXN leads the current stock comparison as Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd., with the clearest separation coming from value and the broader AIQ evidence mix.
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
First Solar, Inc. vs Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.
MAXN leads
MAXN leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Value.
Fragile: 3 of 6 evidence groups support MAXN.
First Solar, Inc.
Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors MAXN over FSLR, 61 versus 51 as of Sep 11, 2026. MAXN's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value, while FSLR holds the stronger quality profile. MAXN also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MAXN today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. MAXN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare First Solar, Inc. and Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd. across the Algovestiq AIQ Score, valuation, quality, momentum, risk, technicals and analyst expectations.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare FSLR and MAXN against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Value45 vs 75MAXN +30
- Quality68 vs 50FSLR +18
- Risk Resilience51 vs 54Even
3 of 6 evidence groups favor MAXN. MAXN’s edge is concentrated in value; FSLR keeps a meaningful quality edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-10, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-09.
Largest factor move: Momentum +9
No new signals fired.
No factor moved materially.
No new signals fired.
MAXN's lead narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — FSLR and MAXN both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
MAXN (Maxeon Solar Technologies, Ltd.): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value.
FSLR (First Solar, Inc.): the counter-case, on quality, fundamentals, technicals.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
MAXNMAXN on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value most heavily.
Growth
FSLRFSLR on combined revenue and EPS growth.
Value
MAXNMAXN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 points.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
FSLRFSLR carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
MAXNMAXN on implied upside to the consensus price target.
AIQ vs Wall Street
Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.
| Measure | FSLR | MAXN | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Implied upside to target | +26.6% | +376.2% | MAXN has more room |
| Target dispersion | +48.4% | 0% | Lower is tighter analyst agreement |
| Consensus | Buy | Hold | Context, not a primary driver |
| Analysts covering | 15 | 1 | Higher coverage generally improves confidence |
Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 6 covered evidence groups favor MAXN. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | MAXN | 51 vs 61 |
| Fundamentals | FSLRon balance | revenue growth 1.1% vs 0%; TTM ROE 18% vs 20%; gross margin 44% vs -39.2%; operating margin 33.6% vs -176.3% — FSLR takes 3 of 4 decided legs, not all of them |
| Valuation | MAXN | Value 45 vs 75 |
| Technicals | FSLR | Price vs 50-day -3.8% vs -88.6%; vs 200-day -9.9% vs -37.9% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 51 vs 54 |
| Analyst expectations | MAXN | Target upside 26.6% vs 376.2% |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of FSLR and MAXN and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 10 points.
- Only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on MAXN.
How the comparison changed
119 daily snapshots · May 4 – Sep 10MAXN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- MAXN +10
- 51 vs 61
- 7 sessions ago
- MAXN +12
- 49 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- MAXN +11
- 59 vs 70
- 90 sessions ago
- MAXN +20
- 50 vs 70
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Aug 10 when MAXN moved ahead of FSLR.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (5.79%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (4.79%)
No active signals
FSLR is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.9%, AIQ +3 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1FSLR closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAXN's edge.
- 2FSLR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3MAXN starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Fundamentals
FSLR leads on balance| Metric | FSLR | MAXN |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue growth (YoY) | 1.1% | 0% |
| EPS growth (YoY) | 21.7% | 0% |
| Gross margin | 44% | -39.2% |
| Operating margin | 33.6% | -176.3% |
| Return on equity (TTM) | 18% | 20% |
| Debt to equity | 0.02 | -0.98 |
Performance
FSLR leads 3 of 3 windows| Metric | FSLR | MAXN |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2.3% | -17.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -8.6% | -30.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -16.9% | — |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.5% | — |
| Year to date | -20.7% | -52.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 1.9% | — |
Technicals
FSLR has the stronger structure| Metric | FSLR | MAXN |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 44 | 15.3 |
| ADX (14) | 14.5 | 22.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.8% | -88.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -9.9% | -37.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 37.2% | 143.7% |
Risk
Split| Metric | FSLR | MAXN |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.72 | 1.7 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.23 | -1.1 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.35 | -1.57 |
| Max drawdown | -37.4% | -84.1% |
| Current drawdown | -34.9% | -82.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 53.1% | 134% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.8% | -11.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, FSLR or MAXN?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, MAXN is the stronger of the two as of Sep 11, 2026, scoring 61 against FSLR's 51. The edge comes from value. FSLR is not without a case — it holds the better quality profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is FSLR or MAXN the better buy right now?
MAXN carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 11, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: only 3 of 6 covered evidence groups agree. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor MAXN over FSLR?
The composite weights Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience. MAXN leads Value by 30 points; FSLR leads Quality by 18 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which has more analyst upside, FSLR or MAXN?
Analyst price targets imply +26.6% upside for FSLR and +376.2% for MAXN, so the Street currently favors MAXN. The model and the Street agree here, which is a broader base of evidence than either alone. Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions, and dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.
Which is better value, FSLR or MAXN?
MAXN is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. MAXN on the peer-relative Value factor, by 30 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, FSLR or MAXN?
FSLR on combined revenue and EPS growth. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, FSLR or MAXN?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum is one of the four weighted factors in the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, FSLR or MAXN?
FSLR is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. FSLR carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. Risk Resilience is a weighted factor in the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is FSLR more profitable than MAXN?
The profitability evidence is mixed: gross margin 44% vs -39.2%; operating margin 33.6% vs -176.3%; ttm roe 18% vs 20%. FSLR leads on two measures and MAXN on one measure, and there is no single profitability composite that resolves the split — which of the two reads as "more profitable" depends on whether you weight pricing power or operating leverage.
Is MAXN's lead over FSLR getting stronger or weaker?
MAXN lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 10 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 119 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-05-04 and 2026-09-10. The lead has changed hands once in that window, most recently on 2026-08-10, when MAXN moved ahead of FSLR.
What would change the FSLR vs MAXN verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: FSLR closes the Value gap — currently 30 points behind, the largest single contributor to MAXN's edge; FSLR's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it; MAXN starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
What do the current signals say about FSLR and MAXN?
FSLR: 1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted. MAXN: No active signals. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on FSLR is Death Cross Active (bearish, long horizon).
Compare FSLR and MAXN with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.