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.
1501.77%
Revenue growth above 1.5x ENPH's 0.48%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
1407.19%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x ENPH's 11.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
172.69%
EBIT growth above 1.5x ENPH's 35.81%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
28.26%
Operating income growth above 1.5x ENPH's 10.07%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
160.27%
Net income growth above 1.5x ENPH's 35.83%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
160.19%
EPS growth above 1.5x ENPH's 35.29%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
160.19%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x ENPH's 36.36%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
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.
-18.99%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-18.62%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-86.72%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 18.56%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-70.29%
Negative 5Y CAGR while ENPH stands at 66.99%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-47.05%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-136.42%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 513.99%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-2146.53%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH is at 49.90%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-2333.49%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while ENPH stands at 73.58%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-39.18%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while ENPH is at 4939.49%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
1647.18%
Positive 5Y CAGR while ENPH is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
434.26%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x ENPH's 19.17%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-111.09%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while ENPH stands at 478.23%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-2041.68%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 180.44%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-157.67%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while ENPH is at 95.25%. 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.
511.98%
Our AR growth while ENPH is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
3542.50%
Inventory growth well above ENPH's 3.88%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
33.84%
Positive asset growth while ENPH is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
31.65%
Positive BV/share change while ENPH is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-24.35%
We’re deleveraging while ENPH stands at 0.13%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
134.10%
SG&A growth well above ENPH's 4.80%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.