#99S&P 500 rank

FSLR — First Solar, Inc.

2-yr score: 59.5/100 (Next 20%)Energy7d
$174.82+0.22%
Description

First Solar, Inc. is a global provider of photovoltaic (PV) solar energy solutions, operating in numerous international markets including the United States, Japan, France, Canada, India, and Australia. The company's primary activity involves the engineering, manufacturing, and sale of cadmium telluride solar modules, which are designed to convert solar radiation directly into electricity.

Score breakdownLatest quarter50.7 · Fair
Growth
13.6
Quality / Profitability
46.6
Financial health
71.9
Ratio screener
65.8
Track record: 2-yr avg 59.5 (Fair, 8 quarters ≈ 2 yrs) · long-term avg 62.0 (Good, 40 quarters ≈ 10 yrs) · next earnings Oct 29, 2026 (in 7 days)
Valuation context (informational only — not part of the score)
Cheap vs. its own history
Entry timing (informational only — not part of the score)
Favorable (oversold / below trend)
Live market dataPrice updated Oct 21, 4:25 PM ET
P/E (TTM)
10.8
Yield
N/A
RSI (14)
41.0
vs SMA20
-1.02%
vs SMA50
-10.54%
vs SMA200
-19.95%
Analyst target
$264
+51.3%
21 analysts
AI theoretical price
$248
+41.9%
as of 2026-09-13

Price chart & technical analysis

Loading chart…

AI deep-dive analysisAnalysis as of 2026-09-13 - price/technical figures below reflect that date, not live market data

As of 2026-09-13, First Solar trades at $209.03 (market cap ~$22.5B), roughly 35% below its 52-week high of $320.95 and 9.0% below its 200-day moving average, with RSI at 47.1. The tape is soft, but the business underneath is still printing a 42.6% Q2 2026 operating margin on a net-cash balance sheet at ~12.9x trailing earnings.

AI sentimentNeutral

Sell-side and tape are pulling in opposite directions, which nets out to Neutral. The analyst community is constructive: consensus rating is Buy (44 buy / 22 hold / 8 sell across 21 targets), median target ~$271.94, with BMO upgrading to Outperform in late August 2026 and Wells Fargo ($313) and Citi ($297) both well above spot. The market clearly disagrees with that optimism - FSLR fell 21.8% over the three months into 2026-09-13 and 7.82% over the trailing month, is trading below its 20-, 50- and 200-day averages, and has been hit by clean-energy ETF liquidations plus over $41M of trailing insider selling. Add a $700M net-cash drawdown in H1 2026 (from $2.40B at year-end 2025 to $1.69B at 6/30/26) and the caution is explainable - it just isn't yet confirmed by the income statement.

Quarterly trend

Two distinct trends are running at once. Revenue: from ~$801M in Q3 2023 to $1,683M in Q4 2025, then flat-to-down - $1,044M in Q1 2026 and $1,056M in Q2 2026, the latter down 3.7% year-over-year against Q2 2025's $1,097M, which management attributed explicitly to lapping customer contract termination revenue. Full-year 2026 guidance of $4.9-5.2B is essentially flat against 2025's actual ~$5.22B. So the top line is decelerating. Margins and earnings are doing the opposite: gross margin was 57.3% in Q2 2026 versus 45.6% in Q2 2025 and 38.3% in Q3 2025; operating margin was 42.6% versus 33.0% and 29.2% respectively; diluted EPS was $3.92 versus $3.18 (+23% YoY) and $3.22 versus $1.95 (+65% YoY) in Q1. That is a margin-driven earnings inflection funded by Section 45X credits and falling cost per watt, not a revenue-driven one - and it is a genuine trend, not a one-quarter blip. The blemish is cash: operating cash flow was -$215M in Q1 2026 and -$145M in Q2 2026 versus +$1,242M and +$1,274M in the two preceding quarters, leaving a ~$1.1B gap between two quarters of reported net income and actual cash generated (accruals ratio +4.24%). That is either H2 delivery working-capital timing (receivables plus inventory build for the new factories) or early evidence of earnings-quality erosion. Q3 2026 settles it.

Valuation assessment

Cheap on every metric versus its own history, as of 2026-09-13. P/E TTM is 12.86 against a 5-year average of 18.71; P/S is 4.18 against a 5-year average of 4.93; forward P/E is roughly 12.0x on the $17.44 next-FY EPS estimate; PEG is 0.33; EV/EBITDA is 8.6; P/B is 2.18 against a 16% ROE and 13.7% ROIC. Debt-to-equity is 0.019 with long-term debt of literally $0 at 6/30/26 and $1.69B of cash. Two honest caveats: the low trailing multiple is partly flattered by earnings running ahead of cash flow, and the discount to the 5-year average partly reflects the market pricing in real policy risk to 45X-dependent margins. Even haircutting for both, this is cheap-to-fair, leaning cheap - not expensive.

Price vs. earnings playbook

At $209.03 the market is paying ~12.0x forward EPS of $17.44, a multiple that prices in either zero earnings growth past 2026 or a material haircut to subsidy-driven earnings. The $62 gap to the $271.94 consensus target is the market's discount for three things: flat revenue (2026 guide of $4.9-5.2B versus $5.22B actual in 2025), negative free cash flow (-$333M in Q1 2026, -$306M in Q2 2026), and the durability of Section 45X. So this is not a stock pricing in growth that hasn't shown up - it is a stock discounting earnings that already showed up. The re-rate trigger is H2 2026 cash conversion and guidance execution, not a new EPS estimate. If Q3 converts the working-capital build and reaffirms guidance, 12x on $17+ of EPS is too cheap; if operating cash flow is negative again in Q3, the low P/E is a value trap and the multiple is correctly low.

Technical picture

Range-bound-to-soft with no oversold setup, as of 2026-09-13. RSI(14) at 47.06 is dead neutral. The $209.03 price sits 0.4% below its 20-day SMA (~$210), 3.6% below its 50-day (~$217) and 9.0% below its 200-day (~$230) - a downtrend that has flattened rather than reversed. Momentum is mixed: +2.24% over the past week against -7.82% over one month and -21.8% over three months, with the 52-week range of $182.99-$320.95 putting the stock in the bottom third. Entry implication: there is no urgency to chase here. A reclaim of the 50-day around $217 is the first genuine trend-repair signal; a flush back toward the $183 low would offer materially better risk/reward for a buyer who wants the fundamental story.

Macro factors
  • IRA Section 45X advanced-manufacturing credits - the single largest driver of First Solar's margin expansion (gross margin 57.3% in Q2 2026). Legislative or administrative erosion of 45X is the biggest swing factor in the entire thesis and is not visible anywhere in the trailing financials.
  • U.S. trade policy as a moat: finalized September 2026 duties on solar cell imports from India, Indonesia and Laos, plus August 2026 Section 232 actions on polysilicon and derivatives, structurally protect First Solar's domestic CdTe supply chain - but invite retaliation and create a policy-dependent earnings base.
  • Interest rates and utility-scale project financing: high rates delay capital-intensive utility solar projects and push out customer deliveries, which is the most likely cause of any future guidance miss.
  • AI/data-center electricity demand: a structural, multi-year tailwind for utility-scale solar procurement and the clearest source of incremental demand beyond the 45.1 GW contracted backlog.
  • Clean-energy fund flows and sector rotation: ETF liquidations have been a real mechanical headwind behind the 21.8% three-month drawdown, independent of company fundamentals.
Key catalysts
  • Q3 2026 earnings (late October/early November 2026) - the critical test of whether H1's negative operating cash flow was working-capital timing or something worse, plus execution against the reaffirmed $4.9-5.2B sales guidance.
  • H2 2026 cash conversion and the reversal (or non-reversal) of the ~$1.1B net-income-to-operating-cash-flow gap accumulated in H1 2026.
  • Domestic factory ramp milestones in South Carolina, Alabama and Louisiana - progress against the 45.1 GW backlog and the associated capex drag on free cash flow.
  • New data-center-driven contract announcements that extend the backlog beyond 45.1 GW and give visibility past the current guidance year.
  • Any legislative or administrative clarity (positive or negative) on the durability of Section 45X credits beyond the current year.
Key risks
  • Policy risk: First Solar's 40%+ operating margins are substantially subsidy-supported. A material reduction in Section 45X credits would compress earnings far faster than the 12x P/E implies.
  • Cash conversion and earnings quality: two consecutive quarters of negative operating cash flow (-$215M Q1 2026, -$145M Q2 2026), a $700M net-cash drawdown in six months, and a positive accruals ratio of 4.24% - reported profit is running ahead of actual cash.
  • Revenue stagnation: Q2 2026 net sales fell 3.7% year-over-year and full-year 2026 guidance is roughly flat versus 2025, so the entire earnings story currently rests on margin rather than growth.
  • High-rate-driven customer project delays or cancellations in the utility-scale pipeline, which would hit H2 2026 deliveries and the backlog.
  • Continued heavy capex funded while free cash flow is negative, and a clean-energy sector in outflow, both of which can keep the multiple compressed regardless of reported EPS.
Investment thesis

This is a genuinely cheap, genuinely high-quality manufacturer with a $0 long-term-debt balance sheet, 42.6% Q2 2026 operating margins, a 45.1 GW backlog and structural trade protection - but its earnings are subsidy-supported and, more immediately, its cash flow has gone the wrong way for two straight quarters. At ~12x forward EPS the stock is not pricing in growth that hasn't arrived; it is discounting the durability of earnings that already arrived, which makes the Q3 2026 cash-conversion print the whole ballgame. I would not chase it at $209 with the tape below all three moving averages and FCF unproven - but if Q3 converts working capital to cash and guidance holds, the re-rating case to the mid-$240s is straightforward.

AI theoretical price methodology

Blended two methods as of 2026-09-13: (1) 14x forward EPS of $17.44 = $244.20 - a ~25% discount to First Solar's 18.71x 5-year average P/E, justified by flat revenue growth and 2026 free-cash-flow burn, but above the current 12.0x forward multiple since today's price embeds policy fear rather than a broken business; (2) 10.5x EV/EBITDA on ~$2.41B of EBITDA (the level implied by the given 8.616 EV/EBITDA on a $20.78B EV) = $25.3B enterprise value, plus $1.69B of net cash = $27.0B equity, divided by 107.5M shares = $251.30. Averaging the two gives $247.75, rounded to $248 - roughly 19% above the 2026-09-13 price of $209.03 and below the $271.94 sell-side consensus, reflecting a business whose earnings are already here but whose cash conversion and subsidy durability are not yet proven.

AI lean: NeutralConfidence: Low
AI review of the deterministic score
Partially Agree

My independent read runs meaningfully warmer than the 50.7 "Fair Fundamentals" score, and the gap is traceable to one specific distortion the formula cannot see. The growth component (13.6, at 45% weight) is being crushed by Q2 2026 revenue of $1,056M falling 3.7% year-over-year against a Q2 2025 that was inflated by customer contract termination revenue - a non-recurring item, not a demand signal. In the same quarter, adjusted EBITDA rose to $644M from $560M (+15% YoY) and diluted EPS rose 23%. That is exactly the case where a purely backward-looking formula penalizes a mechanically distorted comparator. I would hold the quality deduction though: the accruals ratio of +4.24% and two quarters of negative operating cash flow are legitimate red flags, not artifacts. Netting those out, a net-cash business with $0 long-term debt, 42.6% Q2 operating margin, a 45.1 GW backlog and a "Cheap vs. its own history" tag (12.9x TTM vs an 18.7x 5-year average) is better than Fair - I would move the score to the high-50s/low-60s, a one-tier shift to Good Fundamentals. That is a 10-15 point adjustment, hence Partially Agree rather than Agree. I explicitly checked the cyclical-trough caveat: FSLR is not at a margin or growth trough - margins are expanding and the balance sheet is pristine - so that specific upward bias does not apply here; the compressed multiple is about policy and cash conversion, not cycle timing. The score's own note about a +45% revenue move between 2025-06-30 and 2025-09-30 is not an acquisition; it is the H2 2025 delivery and termination-fee step-up, and it is the same distortion dragging the growth score down today.

AI-generated analysis for informational purposes only, not financial advice.