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.
-28.94%
Negative net income growth while PINS stands at 89.24%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
3.00%
Less D&A growth vs. PINS's 12.08%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-134.49%
Negative yoy deferred tax while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-4.79%
Both cut yoy SBC, with PINS at -88.52%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
328.63%
Well above PINS's 83.69% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
99.91%
AR growth well above PINS's 82.54%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
1.62%
Some inventory rise while PINS is negative at -238.14%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
416.67%
AP growth well above PINS's 684.93%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
111.98%
Growth well above PINS's 1.22%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
149.11%
Well above PINS's 66.10%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
22.48%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of PINS's 115.10%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-9.89%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -3.79%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
14.86%
Acquisition growth of 14.86% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-52.52%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -712.52%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
72.70%
Proceeds from sales/maturities above 1.5x PINS's 5.62%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is capitalizing on strong valuations or freeing liquidity for expansions.
589.09%
We have some outflow growth while PINS is negative at -470.66%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
14.44%
We have mild expansions while PINS is negative at -536.53%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-215.22%
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.
-59.24%
We cut yoy buybacks while PINS is 59.60%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.