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.
-4.64%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 4.17%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
103.15%
Positive gross profit growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
81.22%
Positive EBIT growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
82.82%
Positive operating income growth while SEDG is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
79.91%
Net income growth above 1.5x SEDG's 32.04%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
79.81%
EPS growth above 1.5x SEDG's 31.58%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
79.81%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x SEDG's 31.94%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.07%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 0.26%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.07%
Slight or no buyback while SEDG is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-32.48%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-24.39%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-35.27%
Both companies have negative long-term revenue/share growth. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking.
-43.94%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
9.00%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SEDG's 77.22%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-162.65%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 155.52%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-581.92%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is at 155.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-50.61%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 397.67%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-307.66%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is at 152.47%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-171.29%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 152.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-54.33%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG is 172.57%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-103.20%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SEDG stands at 480.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-104.46%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 480.29%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-103.54%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 153.52%. 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.
5.46%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SEDG's 27.93%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
3.93%
Inventory growth well above SEDG's 5.06%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
1.83%
Asset growth well under 50% of SEDG's 8.80%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-64.84%
We have a declining book value while SEDG shows 10.87%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
48.51%
Debt growth of 48.51% while SEDG is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
-49.89%
Our R&D shrinks while SEDG invests at 2.85%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
17.32%
SG&A growth well above SEDG's 9.69%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.