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.
22.00%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 34.35%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
13.01%
Gross profit growth under 50% of CSIQ's 93.28%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
74.46%
EBIT growth 50-75% of CSIQ's 109.59%. Martin Whitman would suspect suboptimal resource allocation.
32.20%
Operating income growth under 50% of CSIQ's 264.25%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
146.08%
Net income growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 216.99%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
162.24%
EPS growth at 75-90% of CSIQ's 213.64%. Bill Ackman would push for improved profitability or share repurchases to catch up.
144.76%
Diluted EPS growth at 75-90% of CSIQ's 177.27%. Bill Ackman would expect further improvements in net income or share count reduction.
4.71%
Share count expansion well above CSIQ's 0.37%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
3.00%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 18.69%. 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.
-431.41%
Negative OCF growth while CSIQ is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-1092.57%
Negative FCF growth while CSIQ is at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
9.37%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 6940.98%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
9.37%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 6940.98%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
9.37%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 3621.42%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
82.72%
OCF/share CAGR of 82.72% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
82.72%
OCF/share CAGR of 82.72% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
82.72%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 82.72% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
107.35%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 5092.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
107.35%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 5092.91%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
107.35%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 1888.55%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
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.
33.66%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. CSIQ's 90.76%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
33.95%
Inventory growth well above CSIQ's 13.91%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
2.31%
Asset growth well under 50% of CSIQ's 29.10%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
-0.35%
We have a declining book value while CSIQ shows 20.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
339.16%
We increase R&D while CSIQ cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
5.58%
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.