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.
-8.91%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 18.69%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
41.64%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x SEDG's 11.51%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-127.98%
Negative EBIT growth while SEDG is at 78.29%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
67.92%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SEDG's 23.94%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
-262.89%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-258.33%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-258.33%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.21%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 7.26%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-1.38%
Reduced diluted shares while SEDG is at 0.54%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4410.58%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-1144.84%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-54.29%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 1030.62%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-14.73%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 318.05%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-17.78%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 103.41%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
48.68%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
31.34%
Positive OCF/share growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
40.35%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
71.54%
Below 50% of SEDG's 433.53%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
80.40%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 71.57%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
70.03%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 47.04%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
-81.46%
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.
-65.29%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 380.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
202.35%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SEDG's 170.99%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
-100.00%
Cut dividends over 10 years while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt suspects a weaker ability to return capital 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.
9.03%
AR growth well above SEDG's 14.56%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
14.54%
Inventory growth well above SEDG's 13.77%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
1.03%
Asset growth well under 50% of SEDG's 26.96%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-7.97%
We have a declining book value while SEDG shows 43.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-3.03%
We’re deleveraging while SEDG stands at 3.51%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
14.78%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SEDG's 3.14%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
0.50%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SEDG's 12.01%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.