Renewable Utilities
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NRGV vs GEV vs PWR vs ENPH vs FSLR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Renewable Utilities
Engineering & Construction
Solar
Solar
NRGV vs GEV vs PWR vs ENPH vs FSLR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Renewable Utilities | Renewable Utilities | Engineering & Construction | Solar | Solar |
| Market Cap | $716M | $281.02B | $112.65B | $4.67B | $23.06B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $217M | $39.38B | $29.99B | $1.40B | $5.42B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-115M | $9.38B | $1.12B | $135M | $1.67B |
| Gross Margin | 22.1% | 19.9% | 13.6% | 44.2% | 41.7% |
| Operating Margin | -35.8% | 3.9% | 5.8% | 6.8% | 33.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | 37.6x | 57.4x | 17.6x | 12.0x |
| Total Debt | $95M | $0.00 | $1.19B | $1.24B | $499M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $58M | $8.85B | $440M | $474M | $2.80B |
NRGV vs GEV vs PWR vs ENPH vs FSLR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy Vault Holdin… (NRGV) | 100 | 231.3 | +131.3% |
| GE Vernova Inc. (GEV) | 100 | 764.7 | +664.7% |
| Quanta Services, In… (PWR) | 100 | 289.0 | +189.0% |
| Enphase Energy, Inc. (ENPH) | 100 | 29.3 | -70.7% |
| First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) | 100 | 127.1 | +27.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NRGV vs GEV vs PWR vs ENPH vs FSLR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NRGV has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 340.9%, EPS growth 28.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.8%
- 340.9% revenue growth vs GEV's 8.9%
- +447.1% vs ENPH's -18.9%
GEV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if dividends and efficiency is your priority.
- 0.1% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs PWR's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
- 15.2% ROA vs NRGV's -40.3%, ROIC 27.9% vs -49.5%
PWR is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 7 yrs, beta 1.30, yield 0.1%
- 31.4% 10Y total return vs GEV's 7.0%
- Beta 1.30, yield 0.1%, current ratio 1.14x
- Beta 1.30 vs NRGV's 3.08, lower leverage
Among these 5 stocks, ENPH doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
FSLR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.39, Low D/E 5.2%, current ratio 2.67x
- PEG 0.39 vs PWR's 3.33
- Lower P/E (12.0x vs 17.6x), PEG 0.39 vs 2.79
- 30.7% margin vs NRGV's -53.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 340.9% revenue growth vs GEV's 8.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (12.0x vs 17.6x), PEG 0.39 vs 2.79 | |
| Quality / Margins | 30.7% margin vs NRGV's -53.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.30 vs NRGV's 3.08, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.1% yield, 1-year raise streak, vs PWR's 0.1%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +447.1% vs ENPH's -18.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.2% ROA vs NRGV's -40.3%, ROIC 27.9% vs -49.5% |
NRGV vs GEV vs PWR vs ENPH vs FSLR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NRGV vs GEV vs PWR vs ENPH vs FSLR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FSLR leads in 2 of 6 categories
GEV leads 2 • PWR leads 1 • NRGV leads 0 • ENPH leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FSLR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GEV is the larger business by revenue, generating $39.4B annually — 181.4x NRGV's $217M. FSLR is the more profitable business, keeping 30.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NRGV's -53.0%. On growth, NRGV holds the edge at +156.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $217M | $39.4B | $30.0B | $1.4B | $5.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$72M | $2.2B | $2.4B | $171M | $2.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$115M | $9.4B | $1.1B | $135M | $1.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$98M | $3.6B | $1.7B | $145M | $1.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +22.1% | +19.9% | +13.6% | +44.2% | +41.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -35.8% | +3.9% | +5.8% | +6.8% | +33.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -53.0% | +23.8% | +3.7% | +9.6% | +30.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -45.2% | +9.2% | +5.6% | +10.4% | +30.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +156.4% | +16.1% | +26.3% | -20.6% | +23.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -42.9% | +18.2% | +51.0% | -127.3% | +65.1% |
Valuation Metrics
FSLR leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.1x trailing earnings, FSLR trades at a 86% valuation discount to PWR's 110.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), FSLR offers better value at 0.49x vs PWR's 6.40x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $716M | $281.0B | $112.7B | $4.7B | $23.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $752M | $272.2B | $113.4B | $5.4B | $20.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.37x | 59.12x | 110.40x | 27.50x | 15.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 37.62x | 57.40x | 17.61x | 12.04x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 6.40x | 4.36x | 0.49x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 121.45x | 45.68x | 22.19x | 9.38x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.52x | 7.38x | 3.97x | 3.17x | 4.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.50x | 23.47x | 12.61x | 4.40x | 2.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 75.73x | 69.50x | 48.75x | 19.42x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GEV leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
GEV delivers a 79.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $80 in annual profit, vs $-147 for NRGV. FSLR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ENPH's 1.14x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FSLR scores 7/9 vs PWR's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -146.8% | +79.7% | +13.0% | +13.3% | +18.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -40.3% | +15.2% | +4.8% | +4.2% | +12.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -49.5% | +27.9% | +11.8% | +6.8% | +17.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -53.7% | +6.6% | +11.3% | +6.8% | +15.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.07x | — | 0.13x | 1.14x | 0.05x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $36M | -$8.8B | $748M | $769M | -$2.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $58M | $8.8B | $440M | $474M | $2.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $95M | $0 | $1.2B | $1.2B | $499M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -10.33x | — | 6.27x | 47.60x | 53.51x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GEV leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GEV five years ago would be worth $79,830 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,885 for ENPH. Over the past 12 months, NRGV leads with a +447.1% total return vs ENPH's -18.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GEV at 99.9% vs ENPH's -39.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -15.3% | +54.0% | +70.8% | +5.1% | -21.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +447.1% | +157.4% | +132.1% | -18.9% | +65.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +140.7% | +698.3% | +345.2% | -78.3% | +20.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.7% | +698.3% | +651.1% | -71.2% | +187.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.1% | +698.3% | +3143.9% | +1737.8% | +324.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +34.0% | +99.9% | +64.5% | -39.9% | +6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
PWR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PWR is the less volatile stock with a 1.30 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NRGV's 3.08 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PWR currently trades 95.2% from its 52-week high vs ENPH's 65.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 3.08x | 1.76x | 1.30x | 1.70x | 1.39x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.35 | $1181.95 | $788.72 | $54.43 | $285.99 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.65 | $387.03 | $315.45 | $25.78 | $125.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +65.2% | +88.5% | +95.2% | +65.2% | +75.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.3 | 66.5 | 87.0 | 52.1 | 64.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.7M | 2.4M | 1.1M | 5.9M | 2.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — GEV and PWR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NRGV as "Buy", GEV as "Buy", PWR as "Buy", ENPH as "Hold", FSLR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 23.1% upside for FSLR (target: $264) vs -33.6% for NRGV (target: $3).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $2.75 | $1119.95 | $647.23 | $43.48 | $264.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 28 | 35 | 55 | 73 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.1% | +0.1% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 7 | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.00 | $0.40 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.2% | +0.1% | +2.8% | +0.1% |
FSLR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). GEV leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 1 tied.
NRGV vs GEV vs PWR vs ENPH vs FSLR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Energy Vault Holdings, Inc.
(NRGV) is the stronger pick with 340. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 8. 9% for GE Vernova Inc. (GEV). First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) offers the better valuation at 15. 1x trailing P/E (12. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Energy Vault Holdings, Inc. (NRGV) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR?
On trailing P/E, First Solar, Inc.
(FSLR) is the cheapest at 15. 1x versus Quanta Services, Inc. at 110. 4x. On forward P/E, First Solar, Inc. is actually cheaper at 12. 0x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: First Solar, Inc. wins at 0. 39x versus Quanta Services, Inc. 's 3. 33x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR?
Over the past 5 years, GE Vernova Inc.
(GEV) delivered a total return of +698. 3%, compared to -71. 2% for Enphase Energy, Inc. (ENPH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: PWR returned +31. 4% versus NRGV's -57. 1%. 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 — NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Quanta Services, Inc.
(PWR) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 30β versus Energy Vault Holdings, Inc. 's 3. 08β — meaning NRGV is approximately 136% more volatile than PWR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 114% for Enphase Energy, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Energy Vault Holdings, Inc.
(NRGV) is pulling ahead at 340. 9% versus 8. 9% for GE Vernova Inc. (GEV). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GE Vernova Inc. grew EPS 217. 0% year-over-year, compared to 12. 8% for Quanta Services, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, FSLR leads at 25. 8% 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 — NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR?
First Solar, Inc.
(FSLR) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 3% net margin versus -50. 9% for Energy Vault Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 29. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FSLR leads at 32. 3% versus -36. 5% for NRGV. 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 NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR 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, First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 39x versus Quanta Services, Inc. 's 3. 33x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) trades at 12. 0x forward P/E versus 57. 4x for Quanta Services, Inc. — 45. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FSLR: 23. 1% to $264. 13.
08Which pays a better dividend — NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is NRGV or GEV or PWR or ENPH or FSLR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Enphase Energy, Inc.
(ENPH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1738% 10Y return). Energy Vault Holdings, Inc. (NRGV) carries a higher beta of 3. 08 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ENPH: +1738%, NRGV: -57. 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 NRGV and GEV and PWR and ENPH and FSLR?
These companies operate in different sectors (NRGV (Utilities) and GEV (Utilities) and PWR (Industrials) and ENPH (Energy) and FSLR (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NRGV is a small-cap high-growth stock; GEV is a large-cap quality compounder stock; PWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ENPH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FSLR is a mid-cap high-growth stock. 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.