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.
8.90%
Positive revenue growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
9.90%
Positive gross profit growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
58.94%
Positive EBIT growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-46.05%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
42.34%
Positive net income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
42.25%
Positive EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
42.25%
Positive diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.39%
Slight or no buybacks while CSIQ is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.39%
Diluted share count expanding well above CSIQ's 0.11%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
28.86%
OCF growth of 28.86% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
35.38%
FCF growth of 35.38% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
80.88%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of CSIQ's 113.17%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
10.76%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 27.72%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-48.95%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-132.01%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-476.02%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-298.04%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-13.06%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 115.74%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-34.13%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
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.
61.90%
Our AR growth while CSIQ is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-9.50%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
0.24%
Positive asset growth while CSIQ is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-3.97%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-0.90%
We’re deleveraging while CSIQ stands at 4.77%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
6.04%
We increase R&D while CSIQ cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
11.58%
We expand SG&A while CSIQ cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.