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.
9.24%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of CSIQ's 11.71%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
-19.88%
Negative gross profit growth while CSIQ is at 23.12%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
5.51%
EBIT growth below 50% of CSIQ's 21.78%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
5.24%
Operating income growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 3.13%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
18.05%
Net income growth under 50% of CSIQ's 78.79%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
17.74%
EPS growth under 50% of CSIQ's 75.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
17.74%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of CSIQ's 74.36%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.64%
Share count expansion well above CSIQ's 1.24%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.64%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 5.59%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
18.87%
OCF growth of 18.87% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
15.59%
FCF growth of 15.59% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
256.51%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 1557.69%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-49.79%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 25.10%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-36.12%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 59.84%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-3127.52%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-100.46%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-297.16%
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.
-702.91%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 552.01%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
66.53%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 326.44%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
-413.33%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ is 341.71%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
30.14%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 1707.18%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-38.31%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 22.46%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
18.92%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 149.08%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-1.03%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
20.97%
We show growth while CSIQ is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
7.58%
Asset growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 2.93%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-3.73%
We have a declining book value while CSIQ shows 1.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
21.02%
Debt growth far above CSIQ's 5.47%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-3.96%
Our R&D shrinks while CSIQ invests at 12.14%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-13.40%
We cut SG&A while CSIQ invests at 34.84%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.