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.
-6.35%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
26.53%
Gross profit growth under 50% of CSIQ's 71.87%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
72.87%
EBIT growth 50-75% of CSIQ's 108.53%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
78.67%
Operating income growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 119.69%. Martin Whitman would doubt the firm’s ability to compete efficiently.
62.22%
Net income growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 95.83%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
62.30%
EPS growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 95.88%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
62.30%
Diluted EPS growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 95.88%. Martin Whitman would question if share issuance or modest net income gains hamper progress.
0.12%
Share count expansion well above CSIQ's 0.14%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.34%
Diluted share count expanding well above CSIQ's 0.14%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.17%
OCF growth under 50% of CSIQ's 100.00%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
72.30%
FCF growth 50-75% of CSIQ's 100.00%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
68.63%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 6757.61%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
54.18%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
46.43%
Positive 3Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
127.60%
OCF/share CAGR of 127.60% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
259.76%
OCF/share CAGR of 259.76% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
606.49%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 606.49% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
77.75%
Positive 10Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-402.72%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-448.13%
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.
-30.93%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 18.85%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-47.25%
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.
16.59%
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.
-3.44%
Inventory is declining while CSIQ stands at 6.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-5.33%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 2.52%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-5.21%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-12.86%
We’re deleveraging while CSIQ stands at 9.14%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-25.47%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-31.19%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.