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.
-7.05%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-91.56%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-117.68%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
52.17%
Positive operating income growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-19.73%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
5.26%
Positive EPS growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
-2636.84%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.11%
Share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 1.69%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.11%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x CSIQ's 1.74%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-16.64%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
37.43%
Positive FCF growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-54.63%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 170.27%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-19.07%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 113.15%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
52.14%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of CSIQ's 82.77%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
-148.30%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
89.98%
OCF/share CAGR of 89.98% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
55.23%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 55.23% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
-123.86%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
66.53%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
-181.28%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ is 124.32%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-72.89%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 395.98%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
707.78%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 90.51%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
4083.36%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x CSIQ's 50.38%. 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.
-8.69%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-23.48%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-8.03%
Negative asset growth while CSIQ invests at 1.80%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-11.43%
We have a declining book value while CSIQ shows 3.49%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-9.91%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-16.93%
Our R&D shrinks while CSIQ invests at 24.90%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-79.07%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.