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.
-13.58%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 13.91%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-21.95%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 19.28%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-32.27%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-195.63%
Negative operating income growth while SEDG is at 21.17%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
167.94%
Net income growth above 1.5x SEDG's 55.26%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
168.87%
EPS growth under 50% of SEDG's 801.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
155.10%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SEDG's 801.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
1.77%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 1287.24%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
18.91%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 526.47%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-86.96%
Negative OCF growth while SEDG is at 220.28%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-82.83%
Negative FCF growth while SEDG is at 167.04%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
204.54%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-29.48%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-43.62%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-246.13%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 122.67%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-122.15%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is at 122.67%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-319.20%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 122.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
113.47%
Similar net income/share CAGR to SEDG's 121.81%. Walter Schloss would see parallel tailwinds or expansions for both firms.
174.47%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 121.81%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
106.82%
3Y net income/share CAGR 75-90% of SEDG's 121.81%. Bill Ackman might push for an operational plan to match or beat the competitor’s short-term growth.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-25.53%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 162.66%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
16.39%
Below 50% of SEDG's 162.66%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-21.43%
Firm’s AR is declining while SEDG shows 34.15%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
2.59%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. SEDG's 14.61%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
5.98%
Asset growth at 75-90% of SEDG's 6.88%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
1.39%
Positive BV/share change while SEDG is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-4.55%
We’re deleveraging while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-2.87%
Our R&D shrinks while SEDG invests at 22.06%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
5.58%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SEDG's 15.28%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.