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.
73.47%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ENPH's 12.00%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
212.90%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ENPH's 12.33%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
37.68%
Positive EBIT growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
86.36%
Positive operating income growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
42.07%
Positive net income growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
43.14%
Positive EPS growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
43.14%
Positive diluted EPS growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.09%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 1.41%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.09%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 1.41%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
57.23%
Positive OCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
45.43%
Positive FCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
456.78%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-26.49%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-2.58%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 26.30%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-1063.10%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 82.16%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-523.38%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 90.68%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-490.23%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-311.40%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is at 90.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
92.23%
5Y net income/share CAGR similar to ENPH's 91.69%. Walter Schloss might see both on parallel mid-term trajectories.
-132.84%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
33.48%
Equity/share CAGR of 33.48% while ENPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-22.74%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
3.74%
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.
10.80%
AR growth well above ENPH's 21.46%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-4.45%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-2.01%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 15.68%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.03%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
2.98%
Debt shrinking faster vs. ENPH's 192.81%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-10.37%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 0.60%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-5.45%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 5.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.