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.
-17.12%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-19.84%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-32.27%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-32.27%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-27.42%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-26.34%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-26.09%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-2.58%
Share reduction while PINS is at 0.89%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-2.04%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-22.25%
Negative OCF growth while PINS is at 0.76%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-32.19%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1969.67%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 198.90%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
274.77%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 198.90%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
94.11%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 129.44%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
2404.37%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 976.82%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
200.17%
Below 50% of PINS's 976.82%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
58.59%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of PINS's 419.15%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
2757.16%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 93.16% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
163.22%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 93.16%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
222.29%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 89.73%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
1627.48%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 130.37%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
113.73%
5Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of PINS's 130.37%. Bill Ackman might push for an improved ROE or share repurchase strategy to keep up.
49.37%
Below 50% of PINS's 493.98%. Michael Burry suspects a serious short-term disadvantage in building book value.
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.
-18.87%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-1.07%
Negative asset growth while PINS invests at 0.59%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
1.29%
1.25-1.5x PINS's 1.10%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
1.30%
We have some new debt while PINS reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
9.38%
We increase R&D while PINS cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-26.26%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.