vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of First Solar (FSLR) and Monolithic Power Systems (MPWR), based on the latest 10-Q / 10-K filings. Click either name above to swap in a different company.
First Solar is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($1.7B vs $751.2M, roughly 2.2× Monolithic Power Systems). First Solar runs the higher net margin — 31.0% vs 22.9%, a 8.1% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Monolithic Power Systems posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (20.8% vs 11.1%). First Solar produced more free cash flow last quarter ($1.1B vs $63.9M). Over the past eight quarters, First Solar's revenue compounded faster (45.6% CAGR vs 28.1%).
First Solar, Inc. is a publicly traded American manufacturer of solar panels. First Solar uses rigid thin-film modules for its solar panels, and produces CdTe panels using cadmium telluride (CdTe) as a semiconductor. The company was founded in 1990 by inventor Harold McMaster as Solar Cells, Inc. In 1999 it was purchased by True North Partners, LLC, which rebranded it as First Solar, Inc. It provides end-of-life panel recycling at each of its manufacturing facilities.
Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. is an American, publicly traded company headquartered in Kirkland, Washington. It operates in more than 15 locations worldwide.
FSLR vs MPWR — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 2025 vs Q4 2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $1.7B | $751.2M |
| Net Profit | $520.9M | $171.7M |
| Gross Margin | 39.5% | 55.2% |
| Operating Margin | 32.6% | 26.6% |
| Net Margin | 31.0% | 22.9% |
| Revenue YoY | 11.1% | 20.8% |
| Net Profit YoY | 32.5% | -86.3% |
| EPS (diluted) | $4.84 | $3.50 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align — see 8-quarter trend below.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history — bar widths are scaled to the larger of the two companies so you can eyeball the size gap and growth trajectory without doing math. Quarters aligned by calendar period (report date) so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $1.7B | $751.2M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.6B | $737.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $664.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $844.6M | $637.6M | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.5B | $621.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $887.7M | $620.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.0B | $507.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $794.1M | $457.9M |
| Q4 25 | $520.9M | $171.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $455.9M | $179.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $341.9M | $135.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $209.5M | $135.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $393.1M | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 24 | $313.0M | $144.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $349.4M | $100.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $236.6M | $92.5M |
| Q4 25 | 39.5% | 55.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 38.3% | 55.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 45.6% | 55.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 40.8% | 55.4% | ||
| Q4 24 | 37.5% | 55.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 50.2% | 55.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 49.4% | 55.3% | ||
| Q1 24 | 43.6% | 55.1% |
| Q4 25 | 32.6% | 26.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 29.2% | 26.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | 33.0% | 24.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 26.2% | 26.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 30.2% | 26.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 36.3% | 26.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 36.9% | 23.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 30.6% | 20.9% |
| Q4 25 | 31.0% | 22.9% | ||
| Q3 25 | 28.6% | 24.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 31.2% | 20.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.8% | 21.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 26.0% | 201.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 35.3% | 23.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 34.6% | 19.8% | ||
| Q1 24 | 29.8% | 20.2% |
| Q4 25 | $4.84 | $3.50 | ||
| Q3 25 | $4.24 | $3.74 | ||
| Q2 25 | $3.18 | $2.81 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.95 | $2.81 | ||
| Q4 24 | $3.66 | $25.71 | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.91 | $2.95 | ||
| Q2 24 | $3.25 | $2.05 | ||
| Q1 24 | $2.20 | $1.89 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest filing — the kind of financial-strength check premium terminals charge for.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $2.8B | $1.3B |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $9.5B | $3.5B |
| Total Assets | $13.3B | $4.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $2.8B | $1.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $1.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | $837.6M | $1.0B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $862.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.0B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.7B | $1.3B | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.7B | $1.3B |
| Q4 25 | $9.5B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 25 | $9.0B | $3.4B | ||
| Q2 25 | $8.5B | $3.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $8.2B | $3.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $8.0B | $3.0B | ||
| Q3 24 | $7.6B | $2.4B | ||
| Q2 24 | $7.3B | $2.2B | ||
| Q1 24 | $6.9B | $2.1B |
| Q4 25 | $13.3B | $4.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $13.5B | $4.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | $12.9B | $3.9B | ||
| Q1 25 | $12.1B | $3.7B | ||
| Q4 24 | $12.1B | $3.5B | ||
| Q3 24 | $11.4B | $2.9B | ||
| Q2 24 | $11.0B | $2.6B | ||
| Q1 24 | $10.8B | $2.6B |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Net income can be massaged; cash flow is harder to fake.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $1.2B | $104.9M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $1.1B | $63.9M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 63.6% | 8.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue; lower = less reinvestment burden | 10.2% | 5.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit; >1× = earnings back up with cash | 2.38× | 0.61× |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $1.2B | $666.2M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years match up.
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $104.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $239.3M | ||
| Q2 25 | $149.6M | $237.6M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-608.0M | $256.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $811.0M | $167.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-53.7M | $231.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $193.0M | $141.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $267.7M | $248.1M |
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $63.9M | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.1B | $196.8M | ||
| Q2 25 | $-138.6M | $189.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-813.9M | $216.0M | ||
| Q4 24 | $497.5M | $102.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $-487.7M | $197.9M | ||
| Q2 24 | $-172.1M | $109.5M | ||
| Q1 24 | $-145.7M | $232.1M |
| Q4 25 | 63.6% | 8.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 67.1% | 26.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | -12.6% | 28.5% | ||
| Q1 25 | -96.4% | 33.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 32.9% | 16.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | -54.9% | 31.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | -17.0% | 21.6% | ||
| Q1 24 | -18.4% | 50.7% |
| Q4 25 | 10.2% | 5.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 12.8% | 5.8% | ||
| Q2 25 | 26.3% | 7.2% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.4% | 6.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 20.7% | 10.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 48.9% | 5.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 36.1% | 6.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 52.1% | 3.5% |
| Q4 25 | 2.38× | 0.61× | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.79× | 1.33× | ||
| Q2 25 | 0.44× | 1.76× | ||
| Q1 25 | -2.90× | 1.90× | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.06× | 0.13× | ||
| Q3 24 | -0.17× | 1.60× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.55× | 1.40× | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.13× | 2.68× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Sankey diagram of revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company. Charts shown full-width and stacked so both segment hierarchies are readable side-by-side on desktop and mobile.
