Chemicals - Specialty
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CMT vs LYTS vs ENPH vs UFPT vs SEDG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Hardware, Equipment & Parts
Solar
Medical - Devices
Solar
CMT vs LYTS vs ENPH vs UFPT vs SEDG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Chemicals - Specialty | Hardware, Equipment & Parts | Solar | Medical - Devices | Solar |
| Market Cap | $227M | $796M | $7.19B | $1.81B | $3.70B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $271M | $592M | $1.40B | $603M | $1.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $10M | $26M | $135M | $68M | $-364M |
| Gross Margin | 17.6% | 25.3% | 44.2% | 28.3% | 18.2% |
| Operating Margin | 4.4% | 6.5% | 6.8% | 15.3% | -17.9% |
| Forward P/E | 23.0x | 22.8x | 27.1x | 24.7x | 4787.4x |
| Total Debt | $33M | $67M | $1.24B | $154M | $423M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $38M | $3M | $474M | $20M | $540M |
CMT vs LYTS vs ENPH vs UFPT vs SEDG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core Molding Techno… (CMT) | 100 | 598.1 | +498.1% |
| LSI Industries Inc. (LYTS) | 100 | 395.4 | +295.4% |
| Enphase Energy, Inc. (ENPH) | 100 | 114.8 | +14.8% |
| UFP Technologies, I… (UFPT) | 100 | 533.2 | +433.2% |
| SolarEdge Technolog… (SEDG) | 100 | 43.8 | -56.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CMT vs LYTS vs ENPH vs UFPT vs SEDG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CMT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.49
- Lower volatility, beta 0.49, Low D/E 20.8%, current ratio 3.02x
- Beta 0.49, current ratio 3.02x
- Beta 0.49 vs SEDG's 2.45, lower leverage
LYTS is the clearest fit if your priority is dividends.
- 0.8% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
Among these 5 stocks, ENPH doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
UFPT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 10.2% 10Y total return vs ENPH's 27.1%
- PEG 0.66 vs ENPH's 4.29
- Lower P/E (24.7x vs 4787.4x)
- 11.3% margin vs SEDG's -28.6%
SEDG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 31.4%, EPS growth 78.2%, 3Y rev CAGR -27.5%
- 31.4% revenue growth vs CMT's -9.5%
- +189.2% vs UFPT's -1.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 31.4% revenue growth vs CMT's -9.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (24.7x vs 4787.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.3% margin vs SEDG's -28.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.49 vs SEDG's 2.45, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +189.2% vs UFPT's -1.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 10.5% ROA vs SEDG's -15.9%, ROIC 12.7% vs -29.5% |
CMT vs LYTS vs ENPH vs UFPT vs SEDG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CMT vs LYTS vs ENPH vs UFPT vs SEDG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
UFPT leads in 2 of 6 categories
CMT leads 1 • LYTS leads 0 • ENPH leads 0 • SEDG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
UFPT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ENPH is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.4B annually — 5.2x CMT's $271M. UFPT is the more profitable business, keeping 11.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SEDG's -28.6%. On growth, SEDG holds the edge at +41.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $271M | $592M | $1.4B | $603M | $1.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $21M | $51M | $171M | $116M | -$210M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $10M | $26M | $135M | $68M | -$364M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$15M | $38M | $145M | $79M | $78M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +17.6% | +25.3% | +44.2% | +28.3% | +18.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +4.4% | +6.5% | +6.8% | +15.3% | -17.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.5% | +4.3% | +9.6% | +11.3% | -28.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.7% | +6.4% | +10.4% | +13.1% | +6.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.7% | -0.5% | -20.6% | +3.4% | +41.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -72.2% | +11.1% | -127.3% | +6.7% | +43.5% |
Valuation Metrics
CMT leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 19.1x trailing earnings, CMT trades at a 55% valuation discount to ENPH's 42.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), UFPT offers better value at 0.71x vs ENPH's 6.71x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $227M | $796M | $7.2B | $1.8B | $3.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $222M | $860M | $8.0B | $1.9B | $3.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 19.10x | 32.38x | 42.32x | 26.79x | -8.81x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 23.03x | 22.79x | 27.06x | 24.72x | 4787.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 3.38x | 1.90x | 6.71x | 0.71x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.34x | 17.78x | 32.47x | 16.81x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.83x | 1.39x | 4.88x | 3.01x | 3.12x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.35x | 3.42x | 6.77x | 4.33x | 8.51x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 118.29x | 22.98x | 75.02x | 22.94x | 45.77x |
Profitability & Efficiency
UFPT leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
UFPT delivers a 17.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $17 in annual profit, vs $-80 for SEDG. CMT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.21x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ENPH's 1.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SEDG scores 7/9 vs LYTS's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +6.2% | +10.9% | +13.3% | +17.4% | -79.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +4.2% | +6.5% | +4.2% | +10.5% | -15.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.6% | +9.5% | +6.8% | +12.7% | -29.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.8% | +12.6% | +6.8% | +16.1% | -19.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.21x | 0.29x | 1.14x | 0.36x | 0.99x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | $63M | $769M | $134M | -$116M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $38M | $3M | $474M | $20M | $540M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $33M | $67M | $1.2B | $154M | $423M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 144.87x | 13.52x | 47.60x | 9.42x | -2.65x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — LYTS and SEDG each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in UFPT five years ago would be worth $40,725 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,503 for SEDG. Over the past 12 months, SEDG leads with a +189.2% total return vs UFPT's -1.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LYTS at 29.1% vs SEDG's -40.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +26.6% | +39.0% | +61.7% | +5.2% | +93.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +47.7% | +55.4% | +22.1% | -1.0% | +189.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +28.5% | +114.9% | -69.1% | +36.0% | -78.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.5% | +222.6% | -63.0% | +307.2% | -75.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.8% | +154.4% | +2713.9% | +1018.2% | +191.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +8.7% | +29.1% | -32.4% | +10.8% | -40.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CMT and LYTS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CMT is the less volatile stock with a 0.49 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SEDG's 2.45 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LYTS currently trades 96.3% from its 52-week high vs ENPH's 74.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.49x | 1.43x | 2.43x | 1.11x | 2.45x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $28.69 | $26.56 | $73.74 | $274.93 | $81.17 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.12 | $16.00 | $25.78 | $173.88 | $13.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.9% | +96.3% | +74.0% | +85.5% | +74.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.7 | 65.8 | 50.4 | 68.3 | 48.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 32K | 487K | 8.0M | 203K | 4.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CMT as "Buy", LYTS as "Buy", ENPH as "Hold", UFPT as "Buy", SEDG as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 26.8% upside for UFPT (target: $298) vs -43.3% for SEDG (target: $35). LYTS is the only dividend payer here at 0.76% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.00 | $28.50 | $45.65 | $298.00 | $34.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 5 | 55 | 2 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.8% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.19 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.4% | 0.0% | +1.8% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
UFPT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CMT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
CMT vs LYTS vs ENPH vs UFPT vs SEDG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, SolarEdge Technologies, Inc.
(SEDG) is the stronger pick with 31. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 5% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT). Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) offers the better valuation at 19. 1x trailing P/E (23. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) a "Buy" — based on 2 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG?
On trailing P/E, Core Molding Technologies, Inc.
(CMT) is the cheapest at 19. 1x versus Enphase Energy, Inc. at 42. 3x. On forward P/E, LSI Industries Inc. is actually cheaper at 22. 8x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: UFP Technologies, Inc. wins at 0. 66x versus Enphase Energy, Inc. 's 4. 29x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG?
Over the past 5 years, UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) delivered a total return of +307. 2%, compared to -75. 0% for SolarEdge Technologies, Inc. (SEDG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ENPH returned +27. 1% versus CMT's +88. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Core Molding Technologies, Inc.
(CMT) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 49β versus SolarEdge Technologies, Inc. 's 2. 45β — meaning SEDG is approximately 403% more volatile than CMT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 21% versus 114% for Enphase Energy, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), SolarEdge Technologies, Inc.
(SEDG) is pulling ahead at 31. 4% versus -9. 5% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc. (CMT). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: SolarEdge Technologies, Inc. grew EPS 78. 2% year-over-year, compared to -14. 6% for Core Molding Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, UFPT leads at 19. 4% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG?
Enphase Energy, Inc.
(ENPH) is the more profitable company, earning 11. 7% net margin versus -34. 2% for SolarEdge Technologies, Inc. — meaning it keeps 11. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: UFPT leads at 15. 3% versus -24. 1% for SEDG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ENPH leads at 46. 6%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, UFP Technologies, Inc. (UFPT) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 66x versus Enphase Energy, Inc. 's 4. 29x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, LSI Industries Inc. (LYTS) trades at 22. 8x forward P/E versus 4787. 4x for SolarEdge Technologies, Inc. — 4764. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for UFPT: 26. 8% to $298. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG?
In this comparison, LYTS (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. CMT, ENPH, UFPT, SEDG do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CMT or LYTS or ENPH or UFPT or SEDG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, UFP Technologies, Inc.
(UFPT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 11), +1018% 10Y return). Enphase Energy, Inc. (ENPH) carries a higher beta of 2. 43 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (UFPT: +1018%, ENPH: +27. 1%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between CMT and LYTS and ENPH and UFPT and SEDG?
These companies operate in different sectors (CMT (Basic Materials) and LYTS (Technology) and ENPH (Energy) and UFPT (Healthcare) and SEDG (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CMT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LYTS is a small-cap high-growth stock; ENPH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; UFPT is a small-cap high-growth stock; SEDG is a small-cap high-growth stock. LYTS pays a dividend while CMT, ENPH, UFPT, SEDG do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.