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.
-144.86%
Negative net income growth while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
15.05%
D&A growth of 15.05% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a mild cost difference that must be justified by expansions.
105.41%
Deferred tax of 105.41% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
1.48%
SBC growth of 1.48% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see some additional share issuance that must be justified by expansions or retention needs.
3361.19%
Working capital change of 3361.19% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-165.13%
AR is negative yoy while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
11304.55%
Inventory growth of 11304.55% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
1203.28%
AP growth of 1203.28% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
875.50%
Growth of 875.50% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a difference in minor WC usage that might affect short-term cash flow if large.
-48.94%
Negative yoy while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
4.01%
CFO growth of 4.01% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a modest edge that could widen if cost discipline remains strong.
-21.74%
Negative yoy CapEx while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
89.23%
Acquisition growth of 89.23% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
63.38%
Purchases growth of 63.38% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-58.91%
We reduce yoy sales while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-33.33%
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.
51.58%
We expand invests by 51.58% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate outflow that must be justified by returns vs. competitor’s stable approach.
40.32%
Debt repayment growth of 40.32% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
-100.00%
Negative yoy issuance while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.