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.
5.36%
Revenue growth above 1.5x PINS's 0.20%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
4.06%
Positive gross profit growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
1.19%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 28.45%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
1.19%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 28.45%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
5.63%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 28.65%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
5.81%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 32.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
5.26%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 32.00%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.35%
Share reduction more than 1.5x PINS's 1.81%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.38%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x PINS's 1.81%. 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.
-64.75%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-91.63%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1682.61%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 29.26%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
355.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 29.26%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
105.45%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 29.26%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
2466.59%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 34.07%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
103.23%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 34.07%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
-25.86%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while PINS stands at 34.07%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
1742.00%
Positive 10Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
613.49%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
36.41%
Positive short-term CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
175.82%
Equity/share CAGR of 175.82% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
70.25%
Equity/share CAGR of 70.25% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
2.66%
Our AR growth while PINS is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.95%
Positive asset growth while PINS is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.52%
Positive BV/share change while PINS is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
1.82%
We have some new debt while PINS reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
11.13%
We increase R&D while PINS cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
1.44%
We expand SG&A while PINS cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.