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.
13.98%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ENPH's 6.67%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
79.15%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ENPH's 7.07%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
237.35%
EBIT growth above 1.5x ENPH's 2.66%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
257.73%
Operating income growth above 1.5x ENPH's 2.66%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
453.98%
Net income growth above 1.5x ENPH's 1.49%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
456.25%
EPS growth of 456.25% while ENPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can accelerate over time.
386.67%
Diluted EPS growth of 386.67% while ENPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal gains can be scaled further for a bigger lead.
0.31%
Share count expansion well above ENPH's 0.38%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
14.89%
Diluted share count expanding well above ENPH's 0.38%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
143.62%
OCF growth above 1.5x ENPH's 50.61%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
104.87%
FCF growth above 1.5x ENPH's 31.24%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.46%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-5.72%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-87.00%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 99.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
178.97%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 99.52%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
191.28%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 96.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
325.66%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 96.29%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-28.22%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-40.33%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-13.38%
Firm’s AR is declining while ENPH shows 8.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
22.49%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 36.22%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
2.33%
Asset growth well under 50% of ENPH's 6.14%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
12.82%
Positive BV/share change while ENPH is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1.67%
We have some new debt while ENPH reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
14.33%
We increase R&D while ENPH cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
1.92%
SG&A declining or stable vs. ENPH's 9.00%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.