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.
49.42%
Some net income increase while PINS is negative at -2699.37%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
8.50%
D&A growth well above PINS's 14.24%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
1049.32%
Deferred tax of 1049.32% 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.
-0.47%
Negative yoy SBC while PINS is 163386.89%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-167.43%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -142.49%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-197.78%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PINS at -168.02%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
330.73%
Inventory growth well above PINS's 182.26%. Michael Burry would suspect potential future write-down risk if demand does not materialize.
95.76%
A yoy AP increase while PINS is negative at -103.90%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-206.59%
Negative yoy usage while PINS is 18.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-170.73%
Both negative yoy, with PINS at -73.21%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
5.22%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -249.44%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-32.08%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -121.48%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-49.49%
Negative yoy acquisition while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-10.28%
Negative yoy purchasing while PINS stands at 60.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
-6.22%
Both yoy lines are negative, with PINS at -1.01%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
61.76%
Less 'other investing' outflow yoy vs. PINS's 58141.38%. David Dodd would see a stronger short-term cash position unless competitor invests more wisely.
-94.04%
We reduce yoy invests while PINS stands at 1646.83%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-53.33%
We cut debt repayment yoy while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-18.25%
We cut yoy buybacks while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.