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.
-62.13%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 17.89%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-65.00%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 50.19%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-108.93%
Negative EBIT growth while SEDG is at 131.44%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-106.87%
Negative operating income growth while SEDG is at 131.44%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-107.11%
Negative net income growth while SEDG stands at 76.74%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-107.05%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-108.75%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.49%
Slight or no buybacks while SEDG is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-19.53%
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.
-192.69%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-481.43%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
5.36%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SEDG's 2874.84%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-8.51%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 2874.84%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-24.46%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 2874.84%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
83.11%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
-532.42%
Both show negative mid-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman might suspect a challenged environment or large capital demands for both.
29.72%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
96.49%
Below 50% of SEDG's 1298.27%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
-154.92%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 1298.27%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
89.12%
Below 50% of SEDG's 1298.27%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-24.23%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
1.53%
Equity/share CAGR of 1.53% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
Negative near-term dividend growth while SEDG invests at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-11.26%
Firm’s AR is declining while SEDG shows 2.04%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
45.07%
Inventory growth well above SEDG's 35.50%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-5.58%
Negative asset growth while SEDG invests at 114.57%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.43%
We have a declining book value while SEDG shows 16521.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-13.00%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-6.85%
Our R&D shrinks while SEDG invests at 15.14%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
3.64%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SEDG's 24.09%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.