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.
30.75%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of PINS's 59.42%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
32.33%
Gross profit growth under 50% of PINS's 74.85%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
58.89%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 311.42%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
58.89%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 311.42%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
42.99%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 320.59%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
43.27%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 312.50%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
43.17%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 287.50%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.03%
Share reduction while PINS is at 4.98%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.08%
Reduced diluted shares while PINS is at 14.20%. 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.
42.86%
OCF growth under 50% of PINS's 208.70%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
53.56%
FCF growth under 50% of PINS's 202.08%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
2009.31%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
376.46%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
121.15%
Positive 3Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
2239.52%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 264.04%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
392.36%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 264.04%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
87.06%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of PINS's 264.04%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
3057.02%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 1152.08% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
615.72%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 1152.08%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
168.62%
Below 50% of PINS's 1152.08%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
2125.44%
Positive growth while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
187.63%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
76.34%
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.
41.26%
AR growth well above PINS's 66.16%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
8.79%
Asset growth at 50-75% of PINS's 13.40%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
9.01%
75-90% of PINS's 10.41%. Bill Ackman advocates improvements in profitability or buybacks to keep pace in net worth growth.
0.36%
We have some new debt while PINS reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
9.34%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 2.20%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
9.08%
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.