PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
226.29 - 230.79
161.38 - 242.52
38.50M / 42.21M (Avg.)
34.73 | 6.57
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.
7.73%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of SE's 8.77%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
-22.59%
Negative gross profit growth while SE is at 7.89%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-3.81%
Negative EBIT growth while SE is at 4.39%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
4.16%
Operating income growth under 50% of SE's 9.15%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
6.05%
Net income growth above 1.5x SE's 0.84%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
5.56%
EPS growth above 1.5x SE's 1.47%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
5.66%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of SE's 9.52%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
0.32%
Share count expansion well above SE's 0.29%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.12%
Slight or no buyback while SE 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.
91.10%
OCF growth of 91.10% while SE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
104.15%
FCF growth of 104.15% while SE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
535.12%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SE's 2475.95%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
77.32%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SE's 367.86%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
32.32%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SE's 68.67%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
1329.66%
OCF/share CAGR of 1329.66% while SE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
48.34%
OCF/share CAGR of 48.34% while SE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
246.94%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 246.94% while SE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
17236.10%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SE's 469.88% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
225.70%
5Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SE's 181.06%. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a better product mix or cost discipline explains the gap.
956.76%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SE's 141.06%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
2390.46%
Equity/share CAGR of 2390.46% while SE is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
325.60%
Below 50% of SE's 793.08%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
142.98%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SE's 69.58%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
5.90%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SE's 13.82%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
13.83%
We show growth while SE is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
6.05%
Similar asset growth to SE's 6.70%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
8.78%
1.25-1.5x SE's 7.50%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
0.52%
Debt shrinking faster vs. SE's 1.06%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
18.14%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SE's 0.65%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
16.06%
We expand SG&A while SE cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.