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.
25.29%
Revenue growth under 50% of CSIQ's 113.79%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
153.10%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 70.00%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
260.81%
EBIT growth below 50% of CSIQ's 1623.93%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
156.30%
Operating income growth under 50% of CSIQ's 819.64%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
235.37%
Net income growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 465.17%. Martin Whitman would question fundamental disadvantages in expenses or demand.
234.92%
EPS growth at 50-75% of CSIQ's 462.07%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lag in operational efficiency or a higher share count.
219.05%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of CSIQ's 458.62%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.53%
Share count expansion well above CSIQ's 0.60%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
17.72%
Diluted share count expanding well above CSIQ's 1.74%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
45.61%
OCF growth of 45.61% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
40.80%
FCF growth of 40.80% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
-6.51%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 444.13%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-21.77%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 52.93%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
0.57%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CSIQ's 24.39%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-1929.57%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
44.09%
OCF/share CAGR of 44.09% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
73.82%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 73.82% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
440.85%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 112.65% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
684.37%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 3.44%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
268.19%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 50.17%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
-107.70%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 120.09%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-110.70%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 110.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-111.80%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 35.04%. 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.
21.68%
AR growth well above CSIQ's 10.70%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
4.84%
We show growth while CSIQ is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
-15.98%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
56.59%
BV/share growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 3.20%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
6.34%
We have some new debt while CSIQ reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
21.12%
We increase R&D while CSIQ cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-1.40%
We cut SG&A while CSIQ invests at 24.33%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.