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.
50.13%
Net income growth similar to ENPH's 48.11%. Walter Schloss would find parallel expansions or market conditions in both firms’ profitability.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
366.08%
Some yoy growth while ENPH is negative at -80.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
16.69%
SBC growth while ENPH is negative at -15.97%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-208.26%
Negative yoy working capital usage while ENPH is 192.98%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-152.69%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with ENPH at -167.35%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
25.58%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. ENPH's 801.79%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
80.49%
AP growth well above ENPH's 119.19%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-116.26%
Negative yoy usage while ENPH is 66.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-80.87%
Both negative yoy, with ENPH at -87.51%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-27.51%
Negative yoy CFO while ENPH is 100.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
14.27%
Lower CapEx growth vs. ENPH's 98.59%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
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.
114.01%
Growth of 114.01% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
28.50%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. ENPH's 98.59%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
7.43%
Debt repayment well below ENPH's 99.68%. Michael Burry suspects heavier leverage risk or insufficient cash generation to keep pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
96.23%
Buyback growth of 96.23% 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.