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.
-22.13%
Negative revenue growth while ENPH stands at 42.19%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
71.96%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of ENPH's 96.29%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
139.53%
EBIT growth below 50% of ENPH's 376.87%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
71.69%
Operating income growth under 50% of ENPH's 376.87%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
130.29%
Net income growth at 50-75% of ENPH's 183.23%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
116.67%
EPS growth at 50-75% of ENPH's 181.58%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
100.00%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of ENPH's 173.68%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
0.06%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 1.33%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
3.38%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 12.91%. 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.
-311.47%
Negative OCF growth while ENPH is at 165.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-447.93%
Negative FCF growth while ENPH is at 203.14%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-71.88%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-42.02%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-53.61%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 55.92%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
14.81%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 121.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
66.29%
Below 50% of ENPH's 496.56%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-34.59%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 2161.88%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
24.98%
Below 50% of ENPH's 107.69%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
163.56%
Below 50% of ENPH's 2137.61%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
167.47%
Below 50% of ENPH's 486.46%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
-100.41%
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.
-100.54%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 178.74%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-101.20%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 3689.79%. 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.
-11.54%
Firm’s AR is declining while ENPH shows 36.74%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-50.57%
Inventory is declining while ENPH stands at 20.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-25.24%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 9.46%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-117.10%
We have a declining book value while ENPH shows 10.96%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-7.17%
We’re deleveraging while ENPH stands at 2.51%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-56.68%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 14.10%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-36.64%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 15.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.