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
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
43.00%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ENPH's 1.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
23.23%
Positive gross profit growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
49.67%
Positive EBIT growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
49.67%
Operating income growth above 1.5x ENPH's 26.34%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
139.84%
Net income growth above 1.5x ENPH's 24.63%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
110.69%
EPS growth above 1.5x ENPH's 21.74%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
109.67%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x ENPH's 22.73%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
162.28%
Slight or no buybacks while ENPH is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
187.19%
Slight or no buyback while ENPH is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-7700.00%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-13.87%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-78.34%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 20.31%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-78.34%
Negative 5Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 174.77%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-78.34%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
97.87%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ENPH's 176.50%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
97.87%
Positive OCF/share growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
97.87%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
100.20%
Below 50% of ENPH's 2178.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
100.20%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of ENPH's 174.41%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
100.20%
Positive short-term CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
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.
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.
25.40%
AR growth well above ENPH's 17.72%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
31.67%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 20.13%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
4.21%
Asset growth above 1.5x ENPH's 2.34%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-61.69%
We have a declining book value while ENPH shows 9.32%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
234.90%
We increase R&D while ENPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
329.37%
We expand SG&A while ENPH cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.