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.
-6871.81%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with SEDG at -26.61%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
6.33%
Some D&A expansion while SEDG is negative at -64.79%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
104.01%
Deferred tax of 104.01% while SEDG is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-2.63%
Both cut yoy SBC, with SEDG at -38.71%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
77.62%
Slight usage while SEDG is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-194.05%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SEDG at -386.98%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
136.89%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. SEDG's 818.52%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
8.02%
AP growth of 8.02% while SEDG is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
56.17%
Some yoy usage while SEDG is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
1530.18%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. SEDG's 14281.79%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
39.38%
Some CFO growth while SEDG is negative at -123.06%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
47.70%
CapEx growth well above SEDG's 87.58%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
101.45%
Acquisition growth of 101.45% while SEDG is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-50.00%
Negative yoy purchasing while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
25166.86%
We have some liquidation growth while SEDG is negative at -24.16%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
126.93%
Growth well above SEDG's 126.60%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
137.35%
Investing outflow well above SEDG's 1.47%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
83.67%
Buyback growth of 83.67% while SEDG is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.