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
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-133.34%
Negative net income growth while CSIQ stands at 158.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-3.91%
Negative yoy D&A while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-2199.28%
Negative yoy deferred tax while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-788.97%
Negative yoy working capital usage while CSIQ is 36.36%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
386.43%
AR growth of 386.43% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild difference in credit approach that could matter for cash flow.
-76.13%
Negative yoy inventory while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-118.48%
Negative yoy AP while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
103.02%
Growth well above CSIQ's 36.36%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
439.84%
Well above CSIQ's 126.30%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
-216.20%
Negative yoy CFO while CSIQ is 171.37%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
54.87%
Some CapEx rise while CSIQ is negative at -1.91%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
100.00%
Purchases growth of 100.00% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-16.94%
We reduce yoy sales while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
77.27%
Growth well above CSIQ's 33.39%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
72.82%
Investing outflow well above CSIQ's 4.41%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
766.48%
Debt repayment growth of 766.48% while CSIQ is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-100.00%
Negative yoy issuance while CSIQ is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
-184.56%
Both yoy lines negative, with CSIQ at -13.16%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.