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
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-6871.81%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with ENPH at -10.75%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
6.33%
Less D&A growth vs. ENPH's 22.79%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
104.01%
Deferred tax of 104.01% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-2.63%
Negative yoy SBC while ENPH is 28.27%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
77.62%
Less working capital growth vs. ENPH's 188.83%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-194.05%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with ENPH at -4379.89%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
136.89%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 71.40%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
8.02%
Lower AP growth vs. ENPH's 6428.91%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
56.17%
Growth well above ENPH's 105.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
1530.18%
Some yoy increase while ENPH is negative at -20960.23%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
39.38%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x ENPH's 20.13%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
47.70%
Some CapEx rise while ENPH is negative at -85.16%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
101.45%
Acquisition growth of 101.45% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-50.00%
Negative yoy purchasing while ENPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
25166.86%
Liquidation growth of 25166.86% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
126.93%
Growth of 126.93% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
137.35%
We have mild expansions while ENPH is negative at -85.16%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
83.67%
Buyback growth of 83.67% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.