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.
-35.05%
Negative net income growth while PINS stands at 334.38%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
8.12%
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.
-112.23%
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.
-0.30%
Negative yoy SBC while PINS is 21.24%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
459.49%
Slight usage while PINS is negative at -144.62%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-165.98%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PINS at -126.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
259.86%
Inventory growth of 259.86% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-84.47%
Both negative yoy AP, with PINS at -132.86%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-455.07%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -202.63%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
-44.74%
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.
-22.47%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with PINS at -42.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-12.88%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -51.05%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
58.42%
Acquisition growth of 58.42% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
2.81%
Some yoy expansion while PINS is negative at -11.47%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-23.27%
Both yoy lines are negative, with PINS at -10.74%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-13.78%
We reduce yoy other investing while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-151.56%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -820.30%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-111.11%
We cut debt repayment yoy while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
-100.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment or preference for internal financing over new equity in the niche.
-43.57%
We cut yoy buybacks while PINS is 9.52%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.