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
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
19.72%
Some net income increase while CSIQ is negative at -85274.86%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
30.42%
D&A growth of 30.42% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
-101.41%
Negative yoy deferred tax while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-100.00%
Negative yoy SBC while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-110.48%
Negative yoy working capital usage while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-741.88%
Negative yoy inventory while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-213.78%
Negative yoy usage while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
110.75%
Some yoy increase while CSIQ is negative at -18868.95%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-68.96%
Negative yoy CFO while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-109.07%
Negative yoy CapEx while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
100.00%
Acquisition growth of 100.00% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-413.81%
Negative yoy purchasing while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
81.97%
Liquidation growth of 81.97% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
20.51%
Growth of 20.51% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-74.28%
We reduce yoy invests while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
50.03%
Buyback growth of 50.03% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.