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.
8.94%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 334.38%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
8.13%
D&A growth well above PINS's 4.14%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-64.57%
Negative yoy deferred tax while PINS stands at 73.16%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
31.26%
SBC growth well above PINS's 21.24%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
388.52%
Slight usage while PINS is negative at -144.62%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-8.78%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PINS at -126.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-89.52%
Negative yoy inventory while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-110.00%
Both negative yoy AP, with PINS at -132.86%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
381.48%
Some yoy usage while PINS is negative at -202.63%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-900.00%
Negative yoy while PINS is 649.10%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
12.25%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -42.90%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
25.85%
Some CapEx rise while PINS is negative at -51.05%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
31.75%
Acquisition growth of 31.75% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-63.17%
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.
116.88%
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.
1863.16%
Growth of 1863.16% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
47.88%
We have mild expansions while PINS is negative at -820.30%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
84.60%
Debt repayment growth of 84.60% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.