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.
-95.57%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 55.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
1.22%
Less D&A growth vs. ENPH's 6.05%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
75.59%
Some yoy growth while ENPH is negative at -68.02%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
20.63%
SBC growth while ENPH is negative at -7.38%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
56.94%
Less working capital growth vs. ENPH's 417.56%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
-94.41%
AR is negative yoy while ENPH is 174.46%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
149.50%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 220.44%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
195.83%
A yoy AP increase while ENPH is negative at -148.54%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-104.82%
Both reduce yoy usage, with ENPH at -88.22%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
130.36%
Growth of 130.36% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might reflect intangible expansions or partial write-offs.
13.88%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of ENPH's 1649.90%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-80.19%
Negative yoy CapEx while ENPH is 3.38%. 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
We reduce yoy sales while ENPH is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
123.11%
Growth of 123.11% while ENPH is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-179.52%
We reduce yoy invests while ENPH stands at 3.38%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
346.36%
We repay more while ENPH is negative at -2.10%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-60.24%
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.