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.
-55.26%
Negative revenue growth while CSIQ stands at 23.05%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-139.07%
Negative gross profit growth while CSIQ is at 11.61%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-91.94%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-25.85%
Negative operating income growth while CSIQ is at 34.72%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-65.77%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-30.00%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-30.00%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
149.04%
Share count expansion well above CSIQ's 0.38%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
149.04%
Diluted share count expanding well above CSIQ's 0.51%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
45.59%
Positive OCF growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
44.58%
Positive FCF growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-99.06%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 116.39%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-98.80%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 41.50%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-97.95%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 3.84%. Joel Greenblatt would look for missteps or fading competitiveness that hurt sales.
97.84%
OCF/share CAGR of 97.84% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
96.13%
OCF/share CAGR of 96.13% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
-117.25%
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.
-219.65%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-115.25%
Both exhibit negative net income/share growth over five years. Martin Whitman would suspect a challenging environment for the entire niche.
-129.85%
Both companies show negative 3Y net income/share growth. Martin Whitman suspects macro or sector-specific headwinds in the short run.
-107.24%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 291.57%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
32.36%
Below 50% of CSIQ's 86.17%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
-129.31%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 46.06%. 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.
-37.90%
Firm’s AR is declining while CSIQ shows 22.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-26.69%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-18.26%
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 4.17%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
-2.59%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-12.47%
We cut SG&A while CSIQ invests at 27.03%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.