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 SEDG stands at 45.85%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-42.24%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 40.05%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-90.10%
Negative EBIT growth while SEDG is at 28.78%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-90.68%
Negative operating income growth while SEDG is at 46.31%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-78.32%
Negative net income growth while SEDG stands at 41.92%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-79.25%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-78.57%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
6.18%
Slight or no buybacks while SEDG is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
-2.56%
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.
-361.62%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-675.31%
Negative FCF growth while SEDG is at 1.03%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
320.41%
10Y CAGR of 320.41% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
19.51%
5Y CAGR of 19.51% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
-35.46%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-194.25%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-3372.51%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
6.13%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 6.13% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
130.22%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 130.22% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
-31.05%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
107.18%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 107.18% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-28.04%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-31.98%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SEDG 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.
74.34%
AR growth of 74.34% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-1.99%
Inventory is declining while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
12.95%
Asset growth of 12.95% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
8.74%
BV/share growth of 8.74% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
19.49%
Debt growth of 19.49% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-0.99%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-3.29%
We cut SG&A while SEDG invests at 11.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.