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.
4.56%
Revenue growth under 50% of SEDG's 31.87%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-41.96%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 83.23%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-413.65%
Negative EBIT growth while SEDG is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-51.69%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-198.26%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-197.56%
Negative EPS growth while SEDG is at 200.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-197.56%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SEDG is at 200.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.16%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
0.16%
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.
545.05%
Positive OCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
236.46%
Positive FCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
7017.95%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
92.06%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-0.79%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
5178.66%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
328.42%
Positive OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
21.67%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
-757.62%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-1985.35%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-12189.31%
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.
-27.00%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-42.32%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
-21.42%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-28.44%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
4.63%
Positive asset growth while SEDG is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-11.19%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
4.61%
We have some new debt while SEDG reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
18.15%
We increase R&D while SEDG cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
46.11%
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.