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.
31.20%
Revenue growth similar to SEDG's 31.87%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
-78.20%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 83.23%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-1010.38%
Negative EBIT growth while SEDG is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-7584.19%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-6871.81%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-6763.64%
Negative EPS growth while SEDG is at 200.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-6763.64%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SEDG is at 200.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
1.25%
Slight or no buybacks while SEDG is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
1.25%
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.
39.38%
Positive OCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
41.08%
Positive FCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
551.36%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
610.09%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
25.83%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-200.41%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-1610.30%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
-387.08%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-320.95%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-1901.08%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-485.94%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
110.96%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
25.32%
Positive short-term equity growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
58.28%
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.
-15.35%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-3.92%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-9.42%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-4.16%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
11.79%
We increase R&D while SEDG cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
33.38%
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.