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.
77.59%
Some net income increase while SEDG is negative at -26.61%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-35.92%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with SEDG at -64.79%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
82.19%
Deferred tax of 82.19% 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.
14.41%
SBC growth while SEDG is negative at -38.71%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
4740.72%
Slight usage while SEDG is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
194.15%
AR growth while SEDG is negative at -386.98%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
234.29%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. SEDG's 818.52%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
-100.00%
Negative yoy AP while SEDG is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
114.13%
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.
-94.79%
Negative yoy while SEDG is 14281.79%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
521.21%
Some CFO growth while SEDG is negative at -123.06%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-164.44%
Negative yoy CapEx while SEDG is 87.58%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-200.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
99.44%
Purchases growth of 99.44% while SEDG is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
3767200.00%
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.
16357.52%
Growth well above SEDG's 126.60%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
558.45%
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.
-318.13%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SEDG is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-3.47%
We cut yoy buybacks while SEDG is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.