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.
4.76%
Revenue growth under 50% of ENPH's 11.22%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-2.26%
Negative gross profit growth while ENPH is at 9.83%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-171.19%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
27.21%
Positive operating income growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-212.19%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-213.95%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-225.64%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.14%
Slight or no buybacks while ENPH is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-11.05%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-207.64%
Negative OCF growth while ENPH is at 72.64%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-221.36%
Negative FCF growth while ENPH is at 103.98%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-73.93%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-64.53%
Negative 5Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 39.10%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-38.36%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 243.87%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-162.53%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 117.99%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
85.23%
Below 50% of ENPH's 293.13%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
88.04%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 1168.99%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
87.07%
Net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of ENPH's 103.39%. Bill Ackman would press for strategic moves to boost long-term earnings.
-66.36%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 140.81%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
23.38%
Below 50% of ENPH's 579.57%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
-82.27%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-77.05%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 2122.50%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
633.78%
Below 50% of ENPH's 11793.91%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
3.90%
Our AR growth while ENPH is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
2.37%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. ENPH's 73.23%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-7.62%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 6.17%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-17.46%
We have a declining book value while ENPH shows 11.16%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-3.83%
We’re deleveraging while ENPH stands at 1.16%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-36.77%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 29.52%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-9.80%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 61.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.