PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
238.00 - 242.07
140.53 - 242.25
26.77M / 38.44M (Avg.)
25.64 | 9.39
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
3.41%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 334.38%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-1.37%
Negative yoy D&A while PINS is 4.14%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
72.36%
Well above PINS's 73.16% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
2.66%
Less SBC growth vs. PINS's 21.24%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
573.31%
Slight usage while PINS is negative at -144.62%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
207.09%
AR growth while PINS is negative at -126.90%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
653.54%
Inventory growth of 653.54% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-1215.75%
Both negative yoy AP, with PINS at -132.86%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-62.17%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -202.63%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
59.29%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. PINS's 649.10%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
23.71%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -42.90%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
35.27%
Some CapEx rise while PINS is negative at -51.05%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
113.12%
Acquisition growth of 113.12% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-38.70%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -11.47%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
8.88%
We have some liquidation growth while PINS is negative at -10.74%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-18.60%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -820.30%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
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.