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.
-198.26%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with SEDG at -26.61%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
-0.31%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with SEDG at -64.79%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
95.69%
Deferred tax of 95.69% 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.
-0.12%
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.
11187.25%
Slight usage while SEDG is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-253.01%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SEDG at -386.98%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
81.98%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. SEDG's 818.52%, indicating lean supply management. David Dodd would confirm no demand shortfall.
34640.94%
AP growth of 34640.94% 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.
931.39%
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.
947.84%
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.
862.29%
Some CFO growth while SEDG is negative at -123.06%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-360.94%
Negative yoy CapEx while SEDG is 87.58%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
100.00%
Purchases growth of 100.00% while SEDG is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-899.45%
We reduce yoy other investing while SEDG is 126.60%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-569.35%
We reduce yoy invests while SEDG stands at 1.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-137.35%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SEDG is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
100.00%
Issuance growth of 100.00% while SEDG is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
-15.49%
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.