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.
19.21%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of PINS's 28.47%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
19.06%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of PINS's 34.64%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
32.02%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 4521.74%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
34.66%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 4521.74%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
32.83%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 5946.19%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
32.58%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 5988.89%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
32.17%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 6004.78%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.20%
Slight or no buybacks while PINS is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.54%
Slight or no buyback while PINS is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
0.36%
Dividend growth of 0.36% while PINS is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
13.20%
OCF growth above 1.5x PINS's 2.41%. David Dodd would confirm a clear edge in underlying cash generation.
-17.63%
Negative FCF growth while PINS is at 2.50%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
1286.29%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 25.07%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
159.42%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 140.50%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
58.62%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 31.51%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
1850.78%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 479.03%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
248.29%
Below 50% of PINS's 2114.49%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
70.65%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 15.71%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
3203.43%
Below 50% of PINS's 10095.10%. Michael Burry would worry about a sizable gap in long-term profitability gains vs. the competitor.
220.50%
Below 50% of PINS's 4410.30%. Michael Burry would worry about a substantial lag vs. the competitor’s profit ramp-up.
123.64%
Below 50% of PINS's 920.22%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
458.27%
Positive growth while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
104.28%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with PINS's 95.64%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
61.43%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 50.84%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
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.
15.61%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. PINS's 31.28%, 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.
7.66%
Asset growth well under 50% of PINS's 53.04%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
10.79%
Under 50% of PINS's 65.06%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
0.03%
Debt shrinking faster vs. PINS's 20.33%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
8.97%
We increase R&D while PINS cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-14.61%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.