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.
-6.69%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-2.73%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-71.58%
Negative EBIT growth while CSIQ is at 50.60%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
104.85%
Operating income growth above 1.5x CSIQ's 56.88%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
-82.70%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-83.87%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-99.76%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
6.32%
Share count expansion well above CSIQ's 0.02%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
115.49%
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.
89.72%
Positive OCF growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
89.76%
Positive FCF growth while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
-69.07%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CSIQ stands at 14.75%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
-61.18%
Negative 5Y CAGR while CSIQ stands at 28.51%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-48.88%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
96.18%
OCF/share CAGR of 96.18% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
96.92%
OCF/share CAGR of 96.92% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
94.77%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 94.77% while CSIQ is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
239.80%
Positive 10Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
1296.83%
Positive 5Y CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
153.46%
Positive short-term CAGR while CSIQ is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
-109.80%
Negative equity/share CAGR over 10 years while CSIQ stands at 208.60%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental red flag unless the competitor also struggles.
-2088.09%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 69.12%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
-153.70%
Negative 3Y equity/share growth while CSIQ is at 45.63%. 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.
28.40%
Our AR growth while CSIQ is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
-50.20%
Inventory is declining while CSIQ stands at 24.22%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
2.32%
Asset growth at 75-90% of CSIQ's 2.84%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
14.20%
Positive BV/share change while CSIQ is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-7.07%
We’re deleveraging while CSIQ stands at 9.72%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-37.71%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.