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.
8.90%
Revenue growth similar to ENPH's 9.19%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
9.90%
Gross profit growth under 50% of ENPH's 20.02%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
58.94%
Positive EBIT growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-46.05%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
42.34%
Net income growth above 1.5x ENPH's 21.77%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
42.25%
EPS growth above 1.5x ENPH's 24.14%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
42.25%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x ENPH's 24.14%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.39%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 3.28%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.39%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 3.28%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
28.86%
Positive OCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
35.38%
Positive FCF growth while ENPH is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
80.88%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
10.76%
Positive 3Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-48.95%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 79.48%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-132.01%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 79.48%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-476.02%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 94.62%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-298.04%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH is 94.62%. 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.
-13.06%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-34.13%
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.
61.90%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. ENPH's 228.62%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
-9.50%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.24%
Positive asset growth while ENPH is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-3.97%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.90%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
6.04%
R&D dropping or stable vs. ENPH's 22.14%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
11.58%
SG&A growth well above ENPH's 12.04%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.