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.
-198.26%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 13.08%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-0.31%
Negative yoy D&A while ENPH is 9.62%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
95.69%
Some yoy growth while ENPH is negative at -434.31%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
-0.12%
Negative yoy SBC while ENPH is 10.75%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
11187.25%
Well above ENPH's 170.67% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
-253.01%
AR is negative yoy while ENPH is 117.44%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
81.98%
Some inventory rise while ENPH is negative at -122.30%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
34640.94%
AP growth well above ENPH's 329.56%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
931.39%
Some yoy usage while ENPH is negative at -686.11%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
947.84%
Well above ENPH's 459.73%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
862.29%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x ENPH's 137.34%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-360.94%
Negative yoy CapEx while ENPH is 36.34%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
100.00%
Purchases growth of 100.00% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-899.45%
We reduce yoy other investing while ENPH is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-569.35%
We reduce yoy invests while ENPH stands at 36.34%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-137.35%
Both yoy lines negative, with ENPH at -480.19%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting net new borrowings or weaker paydowns across the niche.
100.00%
Issuance growth of 100.00% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
-15.49%
We cut yoy buybacks while ENPH is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.