Renewable Utilities
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
SUUN vs FSLR vs RUN vs CSIQ
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Solar
Solar
Solar
SUUN vs FSLR vs RUN vs CSIQ — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Renewable Utilities | Solar | Solar | Solar |
| Market Cap | $28M | $23.06B | $3.24B | $1.18B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $49M | $5.42B | $3.17B | $5.60B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-4M | $1.67B | $568M | $-104M |
| Gross Margin | 31.1% | 41.7% | 23.5% | 18.3% |
| Operating Margin | -11.1% | 33.0% | -1.8% | 0.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 12.4x | 15.3x | — |
| Total Debt | $75M | $499M | $14.89B | $7.68B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $8M | $2.80B | $1.24B | $1.91B |
SUUN vs FSLR vs RUN vs CSIQ — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Apr 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| PowerBank Corporati… (SUUN) | 100 | 11.6 | -88.4% |
| First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) | 100 | 124.8 | +24.8% |
| Sunrun Inc. (RUN) | 100 | 142.0 | +42.0% |
| Canadian Solar Inc. (CSIQ) | 100 | 123.8 | +23.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SUUN vs FSLR vs RUN vs CSIQ
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SUUN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
FSLR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 324.1% 10Y total return vs RUN's 86.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.39, Low D/E 5.2%, current ratio 2.67x
- Beta 1.39, current ratio 2.67x
- Better valuation composite
RUN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 2.89
- Rev growth 45.1%, EPS growth 113.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.4%
- 45.1% revenue growth vs SUUN's -28.9%
CSIQ is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +97.1% vs SUUN's -68.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 45.1% revenue growth vs SUUN's -28.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 30.7% margin vs SUUN's -7.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.39 vs RUN's 2.89, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +97.1% vs SUUN's -68.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.6% ROA vs SUUN's -2.6%, ROIC 17.6% vs -11.7% |
SUUN vs FSLR vs RUN vs CSIQ — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SUUN vs FSLR vs RUN vs CSIQ — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FSLR leads in 4 of 6 categories
CSIQ leads 1 • RUN leads 1 • SUUN leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FSLR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CSIQ is the larger business by revenue, generating $5.6B annually — 113.9x SUUN's $49M. FSLR is the more profitable business, keeping 30.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SUUN's -7.5%. On growth, RUN holds the edge at +43.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $49M | $5.4B | $3.2B | $5.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$500,554 | $2.2B | $541M | $284M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$4M | $1.7B | $568M | -$104M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$32M | $1.7B | -$326M | -$1.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +31.1% | +41.7% | +23.5% | +18.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -11.1% | +33.0% | -1.8% | +0.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -7.5% | +30.7% | +17.9% | -1.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -64.2% | +30.8% | -10.3% | -29.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +27.4% | +23.6% | +43.2% | -20.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +103.6% | +65.1% | +2.1% | -3.7% |
Valuation Metrics
CSIQ leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 8.1x trailing earnings, RUN trades at a 47% valuation discount to FSLR's 15.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, FSLR's 9.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than RUN's 24.3x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $28M | $23.1B | $3.2B | $1.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $78M | $20.8B | $16.9B | $7.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.90x | 15.10x | 8.07x | -11.41x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 12.39x | 15.26x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.49x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 9.38x | 24.31x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.93x | 4.42x | 1.09x | 0.21x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.42x | 2.42x | 0.75x | 0.28x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 19.42x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
FSLR leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FSLR delivers a 18.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $18 in annual profit, vs $-15 for SUUN. FSLR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SUUN's 3.81x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), FSLR scores 7/9 vs CSIQ's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -15.0% | +18.0% | +12.4% | -2.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.6% | +12.6% | +2.5% | -0.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -11.7% | +17.6% | -0.5% | -0.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -13.9% | +15.9% | -0.6% | -0.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 7 | 6 | 1 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.81x | 0.05x | 2.99x | 1.80x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $68M | -$2.3B | $13.6B | $5.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $8M | $2.8B | $1.2B | $1.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $75M | $499M | $14.9B | $7.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -3.52x | 53.51x | -0.02x | 0.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
FSLR leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in FSLR five years ago would be worth $28,755 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,277 for SUUN. Over the past 12 months, CSIQ leads with a +97.1% total return vs SUUN's -68.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors FSLR at 6.5% vs SUUN's -49.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -67.0% | -21.8% | -29.0% | -30.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -68.8% | +65.3% | +86.7% | +97.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.2% | +20.9% | -19.7% | -52.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.2% | +187.6% | -69.8% | -55.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.2% | +324.1% | +86.7% | +14.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -49.6% | +6.5% | -7.1% | -21.9% |
Risk & Volatility
FSLR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
FSLR is the less volatile stock with a 1.39 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RUN's 2.89 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FSLR currently trades 75.0% from its 52-week high vs SUUN's 25.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.87x | 1.36x | 2.81x | 2.28x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.55 | $285.99 | $22.44 | $34.59 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.45 | $125.80 | $5.38 | $8.84 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +25.1% | +75.0% | +61.5% | +51.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.1 | 64.3 | 49.0 | 62.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 558K | 2.1M | 10.4M | 2.5M |
Analyst Outlook
RUN leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FSLR as "Buy", RUN as "Buy", CSIQ as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 89.5% upside for CSIQ (target: $34) vs 17.4% for FSLR (target: $252).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $251.82 | $18.25 | $33.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 73 | 37 | 33 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.1% | 0.0% | +5.9% |
FSLR leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CSIQ leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
SUUN vs FSLR vs RUN vs CSIQ: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Sunrun Inc.
(RUN) is the stronger pick with 45. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -28. 9% for PowerBank Corporation (SUUN). Sunrun Inc. (RUN) offers the better valuation at 8. 1x trailing P/E (15. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) a "Buy" — based on 73 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ?
On trailing P/E, Sunrun Inc.
(RUN) is the cheapest at 8. 1x versus First Solar, Inc. at 15. 1x. On forward P/E, First Solar, Inc. is actually cheaper at 12. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ?
Over the past 5 years, First Solar, Inc.
(FSLR) delivered a total return of +187. 6%, compared to -87. 2% for PowerBank Corporation (SUUN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FSLR returned +334. 7% versus SUUN's -86. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), First Solar, Inc.
(FSLR) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 36β versus Sunrun Inc. 's 2. 81β — meaning RUN is approximately 106% more volatile than FSLR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, First Solar, Inc. (FSLR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 4% for PowerBank Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Sunrun Inc.
(RUN) is pulling ahead at 45. 1% versus -28. 9% for PowerBank Corporation (SUUN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sunrun Inc. grew EPS 113. 3% year-over-year, compared to -654. 5% for PowerBank Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, SUUN leads at 31. 2% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ?
First Solar, Inc.
(FSLR) is the more profitable company, earning 29. 3% net margin versus -74. 7% for PowerBank Corporation — meaning it keeps 29. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: FSLR leads at 32. 3% versus -20. 3% for SUUN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FSLR leads at 40. 6%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, First Solar, Inc.
(FSLR) trades at 12. 4x forward P/E versus 15. 3x for Sunrun Inc. — 2. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CSIQ: 89. 5% to $33. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is SUUN or FSLR or RUN or CSIQ better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, First Solar, Inc.
(FSLR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+334. 7% 10Y return). Canadian Solar Inc. (CSIQ) carries a higher beta of 2. 28 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (FSLR: +334. 7%, CSIQ: +29. 8%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between SUUN and FSLR and RUN and CSIQ?
These companies operate in different sectors (SUUN (Utilities) and FSLR (Energy) and RUN (Energy) and CSIQ (Energy)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: SUUN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FSLR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; RUN is a small-cap high-growth stock; CSIQ is a small-cap quality compounder stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.