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.
-36.46%
Negative revenue growth while CSIQ stands at 32.55%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
223.64%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 73.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
-156.30%
Negative EBIT growth while CSIQ is at 139.36%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-114.78%
Negative operating income growth while CSIQ is at 236.69%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
1213.79%
Net income growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 109.61%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
737.25%
EPS growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 109.09%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
737.25%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 106.82%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.26%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 19.54%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.07%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 22.95%. 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.
-79.62%
Negative OCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-133.00%
Negative FCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
15.16%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 8775.71%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
15.16%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 4591.15%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
89.04%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 1128.77%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
103.91%
OCF/share CAGR of 103.91% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
103.91%
OCF/share CAGR of 103.91% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
249.97%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 249.97% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
106.39%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of CSIQ's 162.19%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
106.39%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 0.40%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
685.68%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 124.77%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
73.31%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 168.47%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
25.27%
AR growth well above CSIQ's 33.17%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
24.66%
Inventory growth well above CSIQ's 5.47%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
22.14%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x CSIQ's 15.96%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
3.16%
Positive BV/share change while CSIQ is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
43.80%
Debt growth far above CSIQ's 40.02%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
21.36%
R&D dropping or stable vs. CSIQ's 50.65%. David Dodd sees near-term margin benefits if the product pipeline is already strong.
4.35%
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.