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.
11.10%
Revenue growth under 50% of PINS's 26.38%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
12.54%
Gross profit growth under 50% of PINS's 37.99%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
8.69%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 410.80%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.69%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 410.80%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
9.45%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 420.28%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
9.88%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 418.84%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.39%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 389.86%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.03%
Share reduction while PINS is at 1.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.10%
Reduced diluted shares while PINS is at 10.15%. 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.
8.20%
Positive OCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
8.33%
Positive FCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
2673.42%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 168.27%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
357.29%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 168.27%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
123.81%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 168.27%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
8665.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 274.49%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
319.24%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 274.49%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
114.16%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of PINS's 274.49%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
3597.09%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 227.46% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
362.24%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 227.46%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
107.31%
Below 50% of PINS's 227.46%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
177.69%
Equity/share CAGR of 177.69% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
77.34%
Equity/share CAGR of 77.34% 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.
13.84%
AR growth well above PINS's 20.29%. 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.
4.33%
Asset growth at 50-75% of PINS's 7.18%. Martin Whitman questions if the firm is lagging expansions or if the competitor invests more aggressively.
3.45%
50-75% of PINS's 6.24%. Martin Whitman suspects weaker earnings or capital allocation vs. the competitor.
3.38%
We have some new debt while PINS reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
17.30%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 5.82%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
16.80%
SG&A growth well above PINS's 14.55%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.