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.
4.76%
Positive revenue growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-2.26%
Negative gross profit growth while CSIQ is at 23.73%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-171.19%
Negative EBIT growth while CSIQ is at 43.32%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
27.21%
Operating income growth under 50% of CSIQ's 101.26%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-212.19%
Negative net income growth while CSIQ stands at 212.97%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-213.95%
Negative EPS growth while CSIQ is at 194.74%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-225.64%
Negative diluted EPS growth while CSIQ is at 188.89%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.14%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 4.16%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
-11.05%
Reduced diluted shares while CSIQ is at 13.89%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-207.64%
Negative OCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-221.36%
Negative FCF growth while CSIQ is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-73.93%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 69.11%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-64.53%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 72.10%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-38.36%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 49.21%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
-162.53%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
85.23%
OCF/share CAGR of 85.23% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
88.04%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 88.04% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
87.07%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of CSIQ's 155.20%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
-66.36%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while CSIQ is 107.69%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
23.38%
Positive short-term CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-82.27%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 127.71%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-77.05%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 70.48%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
633.78%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 37.57%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
3.90%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. CSIQ's 11.13%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
2.37%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. CSIQ's 7.37%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-7.62%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 6.51%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-17.46%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
-3.83%
We’re deleveraging while CSIQ stands at 2.91%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
-36.77%
Our R&D shrinks while CSIQ invests at 2.55%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-9.80%
We cut SG&A while CSIQ invests at 21.43%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.