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.
75.67%
Revenue growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 4.57%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
139.12%
Positive gross profit growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
505.40%
Positive EBIT growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
616.64%
Positive operating income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
320.55%
Positive net income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
329.17%
Positive EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
315.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.14%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 0.31%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-1.82%
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.
477.41%
OCF growth of 477.41% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
156.59%
FCF growth of 156.59% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
10938.99%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of CSIQ's 19424.49%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
53.87%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 143.91%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
53.69%
3Y revenue/share CAGR similar to CSIQ's 57.81%. Walter Schloss would assume both companies experience comparable short-term cycles.
4077.42%
OCF/share CAGR of 4077.42% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
-4.71%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 229.95%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-32.03%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 237.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
821.32%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 10182.12%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
10067.98%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 415.10%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
220.60%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x CSIQ's 198.95%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-19.49%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-10.49%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 20.34%. Joel Greenblatt demands an urgent fix in capital structure or profitability vs. the competitor.
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.
22.06%
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.
6.77%
Inventory growth well above CSIQ's 10.71%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-1.43%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 5.96%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
10.92%
1.25-1.5x CSIQ's 9.71%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
7.10%
We have some new debt while CSIQ reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
31.43%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. CSIQ's 7.26%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
8.93%
SG&A declining or stable vs. CSIQ's 30.94%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.