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.
23.24%
Positive revenue growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-253.92%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-554.55%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-215.67%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-390.49%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-296.15%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-296.15%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-38.35%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-38.35%
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.
-697.99%
Negative OCF growth while CSIQ is at 46.20%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-612.15%
Negative FCF growth while CSIQ is at 13.84%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-98.55%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 100.38%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-97.80%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 162.67%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-96.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 70.19%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-15.34%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-12.63%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-107.79%
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.
-523.77%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-882.15%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-111.99%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-117.92%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 437.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-61.98%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 186.64%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-189.42%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 132.73%. 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.
-34.77%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-70.14%
Inventory is declining while CSIQ stands at 4.89%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
223.24%
Asset growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 13.54%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
-151.68%
We have a declining book value while CSIQ shows 53.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
191.33%
Debt growth far above CSIQ's 21.11%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
211.71%
SG&A growth well above CSIQ's 1.53%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.