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.
-11.35%
Negative revenue growth while ENPH stands at 0.19%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-38.74%
Negative gross profit growth while ENPH is at 5.04%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-444.62%
Negative EBIT growth while ENPH is at 6.82%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-279.01%
Negative operating income growth while ENPH is at 6.82%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-817.67%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-825.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-825.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.17%
Share reduction more than 1.5x ENPH's 0.38%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-0.56%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1062.88%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-493.32%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-52.73%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 379.54%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-9.62%
Negative 5Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 593.97%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-5.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 219.21%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-155.15%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 1163.19%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
53.48%
Below 50% of ENPH's 4799.97%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
27.20%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of ENPH's 467.36%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
31.95%
Below 50% of ENPH's 524.90%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
62.15%
Below 50% of ENPH's 2015.63%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-3593.20%
Negative 3Y CAGR while ENPH is 92.55%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-63.50%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while ENPH stands at 507.03%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-15.41%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 2182.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
5052.45%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 177.26%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
11.77%
AR growth well above ENPH's 17.06%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
20.53%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 0.57%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-16.16%
Negative asset growth while ENPH invests at 9.62%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-12.72%
We have a declining book value while ENPH shows 17.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-40.99%
We’re deleveraging while ENPH stands at 0.16%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
30.34%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. ENPH's 14.99%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
10.61%
We expand SG&A while ENPH cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.