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
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
231.42%
Some net income increase while ENPH is negative at -25.83%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
4.76%
Less D&A growth vs. ENPH's 20.06%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-86.46%
Negative yoy deferred tax while ENPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
35.15%
Less SBC growth vs. ENPH's 334.94%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
16.52%
Less working capital growth vs. ENPH's 129.33%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-508.40%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with ENPH at -219.53%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
43.48%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. ENPH's 180.94%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
319.07%
A yoy AP increase while ENPH is negative at -112.52%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-140.57%
Negative yoy usage while ENPH is 58.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
48.38%
Some yoy increase while ENPH is negative at -6563.44%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
57.45%
Some CFO growth while ENPH is negative at -0.82%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
92.35%
CapEx growth well above ENPH's 42.97%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. 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.
1927.59%
Growth of 1927.59% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
271.13%
Investing outflow well above ENPH's 42.97%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-356.84%
Both yoy lines negative, with ENPH at -17.54%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting net new borrowings or weaker paydowns across the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
29.49%
Buyback growth of 29.49% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.