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.
-62.13%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-65.00%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-108.93%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-106.87%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-107.11%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-107.05%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-108.75%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.49%
Share count expansion well above ENPH's 0.78%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-19.53%
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.
-192.69%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-481.43%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
5.36%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-8.51%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-24.46%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
83.11%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with ENPH's 92.15%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
-532.42%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 92.15%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
29.72%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 96.83%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
96.49%
Similar net income/share CAGR to ENPH's 94.31%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
-154.92%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 94.31%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
89.12%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to ENPH's 97.59%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-24.23%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
1.53%
Positive short-term equity growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while ENPH invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-11.26%
Firm’s AR is declining while ENPH shows 1.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
45.07%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 60.94%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-5.58%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 0.85%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.43%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-13.00%
We’re deleveraging while ENPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-6.85%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 2.99%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
3.64%
SG&A growth well above ENPH's 0.49%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.