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.
-22.13%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 1.88%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
71.96%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x SEDG's 4.95%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
139.53%
EBIT growth above 1.5x SEDG's 1.43%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
71.69%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SEDG's 1.43%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
130.29%
Net income growth above 1.5x SEDG's 19.32%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
116.67%
EPS growth above 1.5x SEDG's 17.57%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
100.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x SEDG's 18.57%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.06%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 1.49%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
3.38%
Diluted share count expanding well above SEDG's 1.16%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-311.47%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-447.93%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-71.88%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-42.02%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 128.56%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-53.61%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 70.47%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
14.81%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SEDG's 141.40%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
66.29%
Below 50% of SEDG's 271.16%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-34.59%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
24.98%
Below 50% of SEDG's 145.39%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
163.56%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 135.79%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
167.47%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SEDG's 31.35%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-100.41%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SEDG stands at 757.18%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-100.54%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 338.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-101.20%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 134.58%. 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.
-11.54%
Firm’s AR is declining while SEDG shows 0.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-50.57%
Inventory is declining while SEDG stands at 12.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-25.24%
Negative asset growth while SEDG invests at 41.88%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-117.10%
We have a declining book value while SEDG shows 9.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-7.17%
We’re deleveraging while SEDG stands at 1260.13%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-56.68%
Our R&D shrinks while SEDG invests at 7.14%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-36.64%
We cut SG&A while SEDG invests at 5.59%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.