Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ENPH scored 43.4, FSLR scored 71.1 — FSLR leads.
Compare another set
ENPH
Enphase Energy, Inc.
Solar · Quality-Growth
43.4
$32.81 · $4.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
27.7
FSLR leads
FSLR
First Solar, Inc.
Solar · Quality-Growth
71.1
$177.82 · $19.1B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestFSLR11.0x
Fastest growthFSLR+23.8%
Strongest balance sheetFSLR0.02
Highest qualityFSLR80 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueFSLR-9%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ENPH
stronger →← stronger
FSLR
51
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
80
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
32
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
90
FSLR is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ENPH
FSLR
$153mC
FCF
$1.5bC+
+10.7%B
Rev
+23.8%A-
0.52B
D/E
0.02A-
32.8xB
P/E
11.0xA
—
PEG
0.33A
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ENPH
FSLR
147% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
9% below
~33%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~12%/yr
-63%
1-yr DCF upside
-14%
-60%
5-yr DCF upside
+9%
-55%
10-yr DCF upside
+51%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ENPH
No notable signals flagged.
FSLR
Why this score
Cyclical growth
The companies
ENPHEnphase Energy, Inc.
Solar · $32.81 · beta 1.63
Why now
Solar · market cap $4.3b. Down 56% from 52-week high of $73.74 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $51.13 (implying +56% upside).
Moat
ROE 13% meets the long-run market sustainable threshold — solid but not differentiated; the durability comes from elsewhere. FCF converts 114% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 56% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.63 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trailing P/E 33x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
FSLRFirst Solar, Inc.
Solar · $177.82 · beta 1.79
Why now
Solar · market cap $19.1b. Down 45% from 52-week high of $320.95 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +24%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.33 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 30 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $274.47 (implying +54% upside).
Moat
Net margin 32% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 17% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Down 45% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.79 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
FSLR leads ENPH by 36.1 points (71.7 to 35.6), its sharpest advantage coming in Rev (grade A-). Note they play different roles — ENPH screens as growth, FSLR screens as value — so the model rewards different traits for each.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ENPH and FSLR diverge
On the headline score the gap is 27.7 points in favor of FSLR. The widest single difference is Value, where FSLR leads by 57.4 points.
ValueENPH 32.1 · FSLR 89.5FSLR +57.4
QualityENPH 51.3 · FSLR 80.1FSLR +28.8
GrowthENPH 49.6 · FSLR 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is FSLR or ENPH the better stock?
FSLR scores higher: FSLR 71.1, ENPH 43.4 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do FSLR and ENPH differ most?
The widest gap is value, where FSLR leads by 57 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. FSLR also leads quality, while growth is effectively level between them.
How are FSLR and ENPH scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.