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.
-1.54%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 8.50%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-67.59%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 15.08%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-154.70%
Negative EBIT growth while SEDG is at 29.50%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-167.27%
Negative operating income growth while SEDG is at 29.50%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-126.58%
Negative net income growth while SEDG stands at 67.02%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-129.27%
Negative EPS growth while SEDG is at 64.86%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-126.83%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SEDG is at 71.88%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-0.48%
Share reduction while SEDG is at 0.54%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.13%
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.
-185.68%
Negative OCF growth while SEDG is at 120.38%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-120.29%
Negative FCF growth while SEDG is at 480.37%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
118.93%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
-71.86%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-51.76%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-59829.12%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 122.20%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-185.54%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is at 122.20%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-283.83%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 122.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-3321.62%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is at 121.90%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-159.04%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 121.90%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
22.92%
Below 50% of SEDG's 121.90%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
-3.86%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-38.42%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
27.56%
Equity/share CAGR of 27.56% 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.29%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
9.37%
Inventory growth well above SEDG's 9.38%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
10.53%
Similar asset growth to SEDG's 10.28%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
-5.07%
We have a declining book value while SEDG shows 14.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
55.83%
Debt growth of 55.83% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
29.59%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SEDG's 18.71%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
30.25%
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.