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.
-20.13%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 31.87%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-41.85%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 83.23%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
83.00%
EBIT growth 75-90% of SEDG's 100.00%. Bill Ackman would push for cost reforms or better product mix to narrow the gap.
84.65%
Positive operating income growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
77.59%
Positive net income growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
77.72%
EPS growth under 50% of SEDG's 200.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
77.72%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SEDG's 200.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.54%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.54%
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.
521.21%
Positive OCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
2000.43%
Positive FCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
7082.42%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
409.62%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
15.78%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
5951.95%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
311.99%
Positive OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
141.29%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-498.12%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-595.14%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-331.67%
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.
75.78%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
2.84%
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.
-27.31%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
4.77%
We show growth while SEDG is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
3.87%
Positive asset growth while SEDG is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-5.96%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
0.76%
We have some new debt while SEDG reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-5.33%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
0.03%
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.