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.
-212.76%
Negative net income growth while CSIQ stands at 212.97%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-43.36%
Negative yoy D&A while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-209.19%
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.
-50.84%
Negative yoy SBC while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-294.08%
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.
-109.07%
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.
-155.30%
Negative yoy inventory while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
22.47%
AP growth of 22.47% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
-239.17%
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.
204.59%
Some yoy increase while CSIQ is negative at -212.97%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-207.64%
Negative yoy CFO while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
160.04%
CapEx growth of 160.04% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost burden that must yield returns in future revenue or margins.
-100.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
19379.11%
Growth of 19379.11% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
1934.60%
We expand invests by 1934.60% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate outflow that must be justified by returns vs. competitor’s stable approach.
77.12%
Debt repayment growth of 77.12% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
81.34%
Buyback growth of 81.34% 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.