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.
13.87%
Positive revenue growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
29.38%
Positive gross profit growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
510.02%
EBIT growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 10.19%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
150.57%
Positive operating income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
314.88%
Net income growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 5.38%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
316.67%
EPS growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 4.67%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
300.00%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 4.76%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.10%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 0.67%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
10.66%
Diluted share count expanding well above CSIQ's 0.42%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
90.53%
Positive OCF growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
68.62%
Positive FCF growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-49.92%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 262.42%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-21.54%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 76.57%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-18.17%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 117.44%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
88.61%
OCF/share CAGR of 88.61% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
84.07%
OCF/share CAGR of 84.07% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
88.00%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 88.00% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
290.88%
Net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x CSIQ's 209.85%. Bruce Berkowitz might see more effective use of capital or consistently better margins over time.
300.31%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of CSIQ's 391.98%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
839.36%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 15.01%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-65.99%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 178.28%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-36.42%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 54.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
373.90%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 15.01%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
18.10%
AR growth well above CSIQ's 7.22%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
2.57%
We show growth while CSIQ is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
11.78%
Asset growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 3.36%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
35.07%
Positive BV/share change while CSIQ is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-5.16%
We’re deleveraging while CSIQ stands at 0.23%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-8.39%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-6.36%
We cut SG&A while CSIQ invests at 8.95%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.