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
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
14.02%
Revenue growth under 50% of CSIQ's 36.92%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
19.50%
Positive gross profit growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
47.10%
Positive EBIT growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
47.10%
Positive operating income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
18.20%
Positive net income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
14.29%
Positive EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
23.08%
Positive diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-4.47%
Share reduction while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-6.70%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-740.28%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-250.83%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1309.36%
Similar 10Y revenue/share CAGR to CSIQ's 1208.98%. Walter Schloss might see both firms benefiting from the same long-term demand.
1309.36%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to CSIQ's 1208.98%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
1309.36%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to CSIQ's 1208.98%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
-2660.50%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-2660.50%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-2660.50%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
220.80%
Positive 10Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
220.80%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
220.80%
Positive short-term CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-9.44%
Firm’s AR is declining while CSIQ shows 132.53%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-12.62%
Inventory is declining while CSIQ stands at 32.31%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.21%
Asset growth well under 50% of CSIQ's 95.62%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
7.35%
Under 50% of CSIQ's 316.57%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.10%
R&D dropping or stable vs. CSIQ's 304.08%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
-1.63%
We cut SG&A while CSIQ invests at 20.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.