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.
20.59%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of ENPH's 30.74%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
62.44%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x ENPH's 46.14%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic sourcing or brand premium explains outperformance.
-8.26%
Negative EBIT growth while ENPH is at 19.13%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
0.07%
Operating income growth under 50% of ENPH's 19.13%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-12.95%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-5.97%
Negative EPS growth while ENPH is at 95.14%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-5.97%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ENPH is at 95.14%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
5.99%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 2213.07%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
5.99%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 2213.07%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
-100.00%
Dividend reduction while ENPH stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
67.36%
Positive OCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
56.05%
Positive FCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
440.15%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
117.43%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
53.55%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
-134.86%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 81.41%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-652.07%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 81.41%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-1310.38%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 81.41%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-97.51%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is at 91.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-898.56%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 91.06%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-550.73%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH is 91.06%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
13.52%
Equity/share CAGR of 13.52% while ENPH is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
-32.09%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability 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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-45.25%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-12.78%
Inventory is declining while ENPH stands at 20.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-0.89%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 32.03%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-12.10%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
20.41%
We have some new debt while ENPH reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-15.68%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 10.37%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-18.00%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 15.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.