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.
814.69%
Some net income increase while CSIQ is negative at -24.88%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
-78.48%
Negative yoy D&A while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
2799.84%
Deferred tax of 2799.84% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-0.22%
Negative yoy SBC while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-118.67%
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.
-125.99%
AR is negative yoy while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-228.89%
Negative yoy inventory while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-253.18%
Negative yoy AP while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
297.30%
Growth of 297.30% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
-165.75%
Both negative yoy, with CSIQ at -114.93%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
134.63%
CFO growth of 134.63% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest edge that could widen if cost discipline remains strong.
50.41%
CapEx growth of 50.41% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost burden that must yield returns in future revenue or margins.
112.76%
Acquisition growth of 112.76% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
100.00%
Purchases growth of 100.00% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
1927.93%
Liquidation growth of 1927.93% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-112.13%
We reduce yoy other investing while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
309.96%
We expand invests by 309.96% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate outflow that must be justified by returns vs. competitor’s stable approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-5828.38%
We cut yoy buybacks while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.