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.
-67.89%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 3.18%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-214.64%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
25.24%
Positive EBIT growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
51.95%
Positive operating income growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
51.12%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 45.16%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
51.26%
EPS growth similar to SEDG's 47.83%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
51.26%
Diluted EPS growth 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 45.45%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic moves (e.g., targeted acquisitions, cost cuts) explain the edge.
0.33%
Slight or no buybacks while SEDG is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.33%
Diluted share count expanding well above SEDG's 0.37%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-126.11%
Negative OCF growth while SEDG is at 3.79%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-145.35%
Negative FCF growth while SEDG is at 35.82%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
22.72%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SEDG's 170.45%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-46.40%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 170.45%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-58.19%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 170.45%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-589.71%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 473.68%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
25.26%
Below 50% of SEDG's 473.68%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-321.17%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 473.68%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-5856.79%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is at 294.40%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-45.21%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 294.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-281.88%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG is 294.40%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-30.93%
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.
-46.59%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-36.42%
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.
-100.00%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-20.67%
Firm’s AR is declining while SEDG shows 11.58%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
6.59%
We show growth while SEDG is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-5.27%
Negative asset growth while SEDG invests at 7.59%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-13.05%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
21.24%
Debt growth of 21.24% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-14.02%
Our R&D shrinks while SEDG invests at 10.77%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
1.33%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SEDG's 12.41%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.