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.
91.05%
Positive revenue growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
78.70%
Gross profit growth under 50% of CSIQ's 244.98%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
-24.88%
Negative EBIT growth while CSIQ is at 18.06%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-125.93%
Negative operating income growth while CSIQ is at 18.06%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-89.04%
Negative net income growth while CSIQ stands at 24.50%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-87.50%
Negative EPS growth while CSIQ is at 41.67%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-87.50%
Negative diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is at 41.67%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
11.95%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 30.04%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
14.76%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 30.04%. 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.
77.06%
OCF growth of 77.06% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
23.51%
FCF growth of 23.51% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
-39.08%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 622.33%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-39.08%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 622.33%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-39.08%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 622.33%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
97.40%
OCF/share CAGR of 97.40% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
97.40%
OCF/share CAGR of 97.40% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
97.40%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 97.40% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
100.81%
Positive 10Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
100.81%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
100.81%
Positive short-term CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
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.
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.
102.42%
AR growth well above CSIQ's 19.97%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
221.47%
Inventory growth well above CSIQ's 22.39%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
86.59%
Asset growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 0.06%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
16.25%
Positive BV/share change while CSIQ is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.51%
We increase R&D while CSIQ cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
266.44%
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.