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.
-12.29%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
2.22%
Positive gross profit growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
12.60%
EBIT growth below 50% of CSIQ's 66.17%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
9.04%
Operating income growth under 50% of CSIQ's 37.45%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
10.29%
Net income growth under 50% of CSIQ's 64.36%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
20.24%
EPS growth under 50% of CSIQ's 64.75%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
20.24%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of CSIQ's 64.75%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
14.39%
Share change of 14.39% while CSIQ is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
14.39%
Diluted share change of 14.39% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-202.05%
Negative OCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-292.59%
Negative FCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
39.48%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 8402.98%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
128.96%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 1077.17%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
73.16%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 445.86%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
75.96%
OCF/share CAGR of 75.96% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
-822.78%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-92.68%
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.
67.76%
Positive 10Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
-4064.44%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-466.76%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
29.34%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 155.35%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-16.57%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 13.54%. 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.
59.84%
Our AR growth while CSIQ is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
15.80%
Inventory growth well above CSIQ's 31.47%. Michael Burry suspects overshooting production or weaker sell-through vs. the competitor.
-1.87%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 5.92%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-0.65%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-28.87%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
39.51%
We increase R&D while CSIQ cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-0.21%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.