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.
-21.43%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-42.33%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
111.92%
Positive EBIT growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
64.58%
Positive operating income growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
1454.16%
Positive net income growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
1511.76%
Positive EPS growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
1581.48%
Positive diluted EPS growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.70%
Share count expansion well above ENPH's 0.75%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
8.33%
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.
111.51%
Positive OCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
107.53%
Positive FCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-48.37%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-26.79%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-11.74%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 14.01%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
117.10%
10Y OCF/share CAGR in line with ENPH's 108.43%. Walter Schloss would see both as similarly efficient over the decade.
107.70%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of ENPH's 176.92%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
110.47%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 9175.67%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
275.24%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 88.23% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
135.32%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
116.95%
Positive short-term CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-98.79%
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.
-98.37%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 170.41%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-96.52%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 10634.09%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-23.94%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-8.01%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-2.95%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
104.47%
BV/share growth above 1.5x ENPH's 16.20%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-0.32%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-21.12%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 11.08%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-15.15%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 1.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.