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.
-46.68%
Negative revenue growth while ENPH stands at 1.99%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-76.32%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-143.56%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-132.73%
Negative operating income growth while ENPH is at 26.34%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-133.34%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 24.63%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-166.67%
Negative EPS growth while ENPH is at 21.74%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-166.67%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ENPH is at 22.73%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
4.01%
Slight or no buybacks while ENPH is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-0.83%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-216.20%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-51.35%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-19.45%
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.
-19.45%
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.
271.89%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
87.52%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 176.50%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
87.52%
Positive OCF/share growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
-484.83%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
94.31%
Below 50% of ENPH's 2178.31%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
94.31%
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.
-2919.88%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
214.53%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 112.35%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
-48.16%
Firm’s AR is declining while ENPH shows 17.72%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
36.51%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 20.13%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
1.54%
Asset growth at 50-75% of ENPH's 2.34%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
5.44%
50-75% of ENPH's 9.32%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
-2.21%
We’re deleveraging while ENPH stands at 2.21%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
594.66%
We increase R&D while ENPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-4.82%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.