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.
-23.77%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-392.47%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
44.06%
Positive EBIT growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
-116.79%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
43.28%
Positive net income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
43.75%
Positive EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
43.75%
Positive diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.41%
Share count expansion well above CSIQ's 0.05%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.41%
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.
-466.37%
Negative OCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-118.25%
Negative FCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-3.74%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 492.12%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-56.64%
Both face negative 5Y revenue/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect macro headwinds or obsolete product offerings across the niche.
-12.41%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-65.78%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-354.59%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
60.99%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 60.99% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
-438.19%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-218.94%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-1.70%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-115.11%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 126.07%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-121.56%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 121.05%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-120.43%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 32.75%. 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.
-10.00%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
8.52%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. CSIQ's 46.99%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-1.91%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 3.68%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-47.14%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
7.93%
Debt growth far above CSIQ's 4.23%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-3.72%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
16.75%
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.