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.
14.60%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ENPH's 8.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
-4711.83%
Negative gross profit growth while ENPH is at 23.95%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-274.31%
Negative EBIT growth while ENPH is at 77.45%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-256.54%
Negative operating income growth while ENPH is at 77.45%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-285.53%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 27.11%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-281.93%
Negative EPS growth while ENPH is at 28.70%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-281.93%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ENPH is at 31.55%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.51%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 2.22%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.51%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 6.45%. 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.
47.66%
OCF growth above 1.5x ENPH's 21.39%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
42.53%
FCF growth 50-75% of ENPH's 57.38%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
-33.88%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-33.15%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
12.39%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-329.39%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 101.80%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-58.31%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 283.53%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
45.10%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 116.44%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-908.65%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is at 98.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-2061.24%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 73.97%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-6649.94%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-97.97%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while ENPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-96.88%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-97.83%
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.
3.38%
AR growth well above ENPH's 5.53%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
3.89%
We show growth while ENPH is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-18.85%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 3.03%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-75.77%
We have a declining book value while ENPH shows 5.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-16.71%
We’re deleveraging while ENPH stands at 2.49%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
65.82%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ENPH's 24.17%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-0.34%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 4.76%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.