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.
-112.00%
Negative net income growth while CSIQ stands at 243.32%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
10.99%
Some D&A expansion while CSIQ is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-122.16%
Negative yoy deferred tax while CSIQ stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-9.82%
Both cut yoy SBC, with CSIQ at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-285.82%
Negative yoy working capital usage while CSIQ is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
129.25%
AR growth while CSIQ is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
53.27%
Inventory growth well above CSIQ's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
69.14%
AP growth well above CSIQ's 100.00%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-106.69%
Negative yoy usage while CSIQ is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
109.60%
Some yoy increase while CSIQ is negative at -19.98%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-367.05%
Negative yoy CFO while CSIQ is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-2.44%
Both yoy lines negative, with CSIQ at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-100.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with CSIQ at -100.00%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-99.10%
We reduce yoy sales while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
100.00%
Growth well above CSIQ's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-101.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with CSIQ at -100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
110.53%
Debt repayment 1.25-1.5x CSIQ's 100.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see an edge in lowering interest burdens unless competitor invests in profitable expansions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
51.72%
Buyback growth of 51.72% 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.