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.
-26.65%
Negative revenue growth while ENPH stands at 42.42%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-42.24%
Negative gross profit growth while ENPH is at 43.83%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-90.10%
Negative EBIT growth while ENPH is at 56.99%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-90.68%
Negative operating income growth while ENPH is at 56.99%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-78.32%
Negative net income growth while ENPH stands at 51.40%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-79.25%
Negative EPS growth while ENPH is at 52.60%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-78.57%
Negative diluted EPS growth while ENPH is at 52.60%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
6.18%
Share count expansion well above ENPH's 1.05%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
-2.56%
Reduced diluted shares while ENPH is at 1.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-361.62%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-675.31%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
320.41%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
19.51%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
-35.46%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-194.25%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 99.86%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-3372.51%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 99.86%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
6.13%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 99.95%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
130.22%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x ENPH's 97.80%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
-31.05%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is 97.80%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
107.18%
3Y net income/share CAGR similar to ENPH's 99.29%. Walter Schloss would attribute it to shared growth factors or demand patterns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-28.04%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-31.98%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
74.34%
AR growth well above ENPH's 63.57%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-1.99%
Inventory is declining while ENPH stands at 11.42%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
12.95%
Asset growth at 75-90% of ENPH's 16.72%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
8.74%
BV/share growth above 1.5x ENPH's 0.91%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
19.49%
We have some new debt while ENPH reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-0.99%
Our R&D shrinks while ENPH invests at 22.69%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-3.29%
We cut SG&A while ENPH invests at 18.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.