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.
8.51%
Positive revenue growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
24.75%
Positive gross profit growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
89.86%
Positive EBIT growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
93.76%
Positive operating income growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
191.18%
Positive net income growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
194.44%
Positive EPS growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
180.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.60%
Share count expansion well above ENPH's 0.41%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
6.01%
Diluted share count expanding well above ENPH's 0.41%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
53.52%
Positive OCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
351.94%
Positive FCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
78.80%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
121.98%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
21.07%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
108.12%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with ENPH's 103.04%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
165.11%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 103.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
122.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ENPH's 100.95%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
125.74%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ENPH's 94.15%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
552.49%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 94.15%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
2520.61%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 98.65%. 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.
-29.92%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-44.44%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
-46.16%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-4.56%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-1.86%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
2.55%
Positive BV/share change while ENPH is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.36%
We have some new debt while ENPH reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-1.33%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 4.19%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-2.89%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 6.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.