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.
91.05%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ENPH's 1.99%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
78.70%
Positive gross profit growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
-24.88%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-125.93%
Negative operating income growth while ENPH is at 26.34%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-89.04%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 24.63%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-87.50%
Negative EPS growth while ENPH is at 21.74%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-87.50%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ENPH is at 22.73%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
11.95%
Slight or no buybacks while ENPH is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
14.76%
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.
77.06%
Positive OCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
23.51%
Positive FCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-39.08%
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.
-39.08%
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.
-39.08%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
97.40%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ENPH's 176.50%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
97.40%
Positive OCF/share growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
97.40%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
100.81%
Below 50% of ENPH's 2178.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
100.81%
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.
100.81%
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.
102.42%
AR growth well above ENPH's 17.72%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
221.47%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 20.13%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
86.59%
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.
16.25%
BV/share growth above 1.5x ENPH's 9.32%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.51%
We increase R&D while ENPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
266.44%
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.