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.
-17.13%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-56.88%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
64.12%
Positive EBIT growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-44.93%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
26.00%
Positive net income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
-294.44%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
86.35%
Positive diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.04%
Share reduction while CSIQ is at 0.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
0.06%
Slight or no buyback while CSIQ is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-39.92%
Negative OCF growth while CSIQ is at 21.03%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-89.21%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
-61.22%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 150.54%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-37.05%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 69.23%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
1.50%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 48.12%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-159.44%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 99.40%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
13.70%
OCF/share CAGR of 13.70% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
-281.16%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 151.07%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-185.83%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
85.92%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-106.52%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-81.01%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 401.11%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
218.02%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 87.09%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
-26.48%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 47.58%. 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.
-10.64%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-19.39%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-6.93%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 4.35%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-27.56%
We have a declining book value while CSIQ shows 2.28%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
4.38%
We have some new debt while CSIQ reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-11.23%
Our R&D shrinks while CSIQ invests at 9.02%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
8.26%
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.