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.
-2.89%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-32.38%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-64.37%
Negative EBIT growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-67.05%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-79.39%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-79.78%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-79.45%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.12%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 0.42%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-1.65%
Reduced diluted shares while SEDG is at 0.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13.88%
Positive OCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-323.16%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
6445.22%
10Y CAGR of 6445.22% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
5.50%
5Y CAGR of 5.50% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
-46.37%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
1256.12%
OCF/share CAGR of 1256.12% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
-52.33%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-89.41%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
229.38%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 229.38% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
-49.88%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-88.45%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-27.56%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-46.96%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
-12.14%
Firm’s AR is declining while SEDG shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-14.75%
Inventory is declining while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
3.71%
Asset growth of 3.71% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
3.92%
BV/share growth of 3.92% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
0.30%
Debt growth of 0.30% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
13.88%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SEDG's 13.30%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
20.40%
SG&A growth well above SEDG's 15.37%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.