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.
-1.54%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-67.59%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-154.70%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-167.27%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-126.58%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-129.27%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-126.83%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-0.48%
Share reduction while ENPH is at 1.13%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.13%
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.
-185.68%
Negative OCF growth while ENPH is at 234.96%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-120.29%
Negative FCF growth while ENPH is at 153.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
118.93%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-71.86%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-51.76%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 2.86%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-59829.12%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 103.68%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-185.54%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 103.68%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-283.83%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-3321.62%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is at 94.39%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-159.04%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 94.39%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
22.92%
Positive short-term CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-3.86%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-38.42%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
27.56%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.29%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
9.37%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 11.12%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
10.53%
Positive asset growth while ENPH is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-5.07%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
55.83%
Debt growth of 55.83% while ENPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
29.59%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ENPH's 4.02%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
30.25%
SG&A growth well above ENPH's 3.97%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.