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.
40.52%
Positive revenue growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-124.82%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-481.19%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-2818.90%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-578.55%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-586.21%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-586.21%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.17%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 3.19%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.17%
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.
478.71%
OCF growth above 1.5x SEDG's 1.48%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
293.13%
Positive FCF growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
554.41%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
28.41%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
40.91%
Positive 3Y CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
643.25%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SEDG's 139.04%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
156.27%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 139.04%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
1197.14%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SEDG's 139.04%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
-1257.38%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is at 108.27%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-133.75%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 108.27%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-1180.57%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG is 108.27%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-1.90%
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.
-44.19%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-20.78%
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.
-2.07%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-10.16%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-10.39%
Negative asset growth while SEDG invests at 2.86%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-16.78%
We have a declining book value while SEDG shows 24.87%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-28.73%
We’re deleveraging while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-15.25%
Our R&D shrinks while SEDG invests at 4.12%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-16.93%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.