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.
-23.77%
Negative revenue growth while SEDG stands at 3.11%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-392.47%
Negative gross profit growth while SEDG is at 8.03%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
44.06%
EBIT growth above 1.5x SEDG's 15.93%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
-116.79%
Negative operating income growth while SEDG is at 17.09%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
43.28%
Net income growth comparable to SEDG's 47.00%. Walter Schloss might see both following similar market or cost trajectories.
43.75%
EPS growth similar to SEDG's 42.86%. Walter Schloss would assume both have parallel share structures and profit trends.
43.75%
Similar diluted EPS growth to SEDG's 44.44%. Walter Schloss might see standard sector or cyclical influences on both firms.
0.41%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SEDG's 2.90%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.41%
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.
-466.37%
Negative OCF growth while SEDG is at 20.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-118.25%
Negative FCF growth while SEDG is at 19.61%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-3.74%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 455.84%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-56.64%
Negative 5Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 455.84%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-12.41%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SEDG stands at 84.36%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-65.78%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG stands at 814.84%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-354.59%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SEDG is at 814.84%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
60.99%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SEDG's 212.39%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-438.19%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is at 326.83%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-218.94%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SEDG is 326.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-1.70%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-115.11%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while SEDG stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-121.56%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-120.43%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while SEDG is at 125.08%. 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.
-10.00%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
8.52%
Inventory growth well above SEDG's 6.56%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-1.91%
Negative asset growth while SEDG invests at 22.03%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-47.14%
We have a declining book value while SEDG shows 18.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
7.93%
Debt shrinking faster vs. SEDG's 187.16%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
-3.72%
Our R&D shrinks while SEDG invests at 6.03%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
16.75%
SG&A growth well above SEDG's 2.63%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.