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.
6.67%
Revenue growth under 50% of ENPH's 18.32%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-177.61%
Negative gross profit growth while ENPH is at 11.48%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-80.71%
Negative EBIT growth while ENPH is at 1437.70%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
33.93%
Operating income growth under 50% of ENPH's 1437.70%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-76.09%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 120.43%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-75.00%
Negative EPS growth while ENPH is at 129.59%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-75.00%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ENPH is at 129.59%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.08%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 3.74%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.08%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 10.79%. 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.
83.73%
Positive OCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
56.28%
Positive FCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-35.00%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-38.39%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
17.44%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-132.84%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 100.36%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-168.88%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
91.47%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-405.40%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is at 100.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-709.40%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 109.95%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-19.28%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH is 101.91%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-111.66%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-116.09%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-113.86%
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.
-13.76%
Firm’s AR is declining while ENPH shows 45.87%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-19.52%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-24.74%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 4.11%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-393.59%
We have a declining book value while ENPH shows 80.37%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-54.80%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-0.80%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-29.30%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.