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.
43.00%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 31.87%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if differentiation or pricing power justifies outperformance.
23.23%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SEDG's 83.23%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
49.67%
EBIT growth below 50% of SEDG's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
49.67%
Positive operating income growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
139.84%
Positive net income growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
110.69%
EPS growth at 50-75% of SEDG's 200.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
109.67%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of SEDG's 200.00%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
162.28%
Slight or no buybacks while SEDG is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
187.19%
Slight or no buyback while SEDG 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.
-7700.00%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-13.87%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-78.34%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-78.34%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-78.34%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
97.87%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
97.87%
Positive OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
97.87%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
100.20%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
100.20%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
100.20%
Positive short-term CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
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.
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.
25.40%
Our AR growth while SEDG is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
31.67%
We show growth while SEDG is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
4.21%
Positive asset growth while SEDG is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-61.69%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
234.90%
We increase R&D while SEDG cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
329.37%
We expand SG&A while SEDG cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.