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.
-150.75%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 30.25%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
6.21%
Less D&A growth vs. ENPH's 20.96%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
1306.90%
Some yoy growth while ENPH is negative at -63.58%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
-7.55%
Negative yoy SBC while ENPH is 21.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
92.99%
Slight usage while ENPH is negative at -245.34%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-5.15%
AR is negative yoy while ENPH is 75.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-129.49%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with ENPH at -997.30%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
204.80%
A yoy AP increase while ENPH is negative at -49.80%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
213.44%
Growth well above ENPH's 60.98%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
699.03%
Well above ENPH's 59.33%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
120.36%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x ENPH's 2.31%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
25.82%
CapEx growth well above ENPH's 30.59%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
8190.69%
Acquisition growth of 8190.69% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-29.87%
Negative yoy purchasing while ENPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-100.00%
We reduce yoy sales while ENPH is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-102.55%
We reduce yoy other investing while ENPH is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-228.81%
We reduce yoy invests while ENPH stands at 30.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
312.87%
We repay more while ENPH is negative at -74.24%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
12.51%
Buyback growth of 12.51% 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.