PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
743.76 - 757.57
479.80 - 796.25
8.25M / 11.73M (Avg.)
27.40 | 27.58
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.
23.22%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of PINS's 43.63%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
24.84%
Gross profit growth under 50% of PINS's 61.90%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
35.27%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 296.42%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
35.27%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 296.42%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
33.97%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 349.10%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
34.83%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 337.53%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
35.23%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 337.53%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.93%
Share reduction while PINS is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.12%
Reduced diluted shares while PINS is at 0.00%. 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.
2.51%
Positive OCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-20.11%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1172.67%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
476.62%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
187.48%
Positive 3Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1182.18%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 57.75%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
450.09%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 57.75%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
169.84%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 57.75%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
1839.28%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 290.29% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
1066.32%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 290.29%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
339.65%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 290.29%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
1361.37%
Positive growth while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
379.24%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
88.88%
Positive short-term equity growth while PINS is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
25.24%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. PINS's 59.83%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.28%
Similar asset growth to PINS's 5.78%. Walter Schloss finds parallel expansions or investment rates.
5.69%
Positive BV/share change while PINS is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
614.29%
We have some new debt while PINS reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
7.45%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 4.61%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
19.92%
SG&A growth well above PINS's 10.43%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.