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.
-4.26%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 31.87%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
22.85%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SEDG's 83.23%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
64.97%
EBIT growth 50-75% of SEDG's 100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
64.97%
Positive operating income growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-42.17%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-48.00%
Negative EPS growth while SEDG is at 200.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-42.80%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SEDG is at 200.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-2.93%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-1.67%
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.
250.43%
Positive OCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
86.11%
Positive FCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
3606.18%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
3606.18%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
3606.18%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1285.43%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
1285.43%
Positive OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
1285.43%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
145.49%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
145.49%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
145.49%
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.
8.42%
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.
40.59%
We show growth while SEDG is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
7.61%
Positive asset growth while SEDG is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.78%
Positive BV/share change while SEDG is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-149.74%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
15.74%
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.