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.
73.47%
Positive revenue growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
212.90%
Positive gross profit growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
37.68%
Positive EBIT growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
86.36%
Positive operating income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
42.07%
Positive net income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
43.14%
Positive EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
43.14%
Positive diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.09%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 0.30%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.09%
Slight or no buyback while CSIQ is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
57.23%
OCF growth of 57.23% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
45.43%
FCF growth of 45.43% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
456.78%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 1240.34%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-26.49%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-2.58%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 9.93%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-1063.10%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
-523.38%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-490.23%
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.
-311.40%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 2271.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
92.23%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of CSIQ's 126.58%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
-132.84%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
33.48%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 1138.23%. Michael Burry would suspect poor capital allocation or persistent net losses eroding long-term equity build-up.
-22.74%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 33.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
3.74%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 110.09%. 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.
10.80%
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.
-4.45%
Inventory is declining while CSIQ stands at 1.35%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
-2.01%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 5.75%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-1.03%
We have a declining book value while CSIQ shows 0.53%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
2.98%
Debt growth far above CSIQ's 2.35%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-10.37%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-5.45%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.