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.
35.39%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 320.59%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
7.10%
Some D&A expansion while PINS is negative at -12.62%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
1127.94%
Deferred tax of 1127.94% 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.
0.88%
SBC growth while PINS is negative at -5.91%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
125.13%
Slight usage while PINS is negative at -100.09%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-51.21%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PINS at -76.07%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
40.55%
Some inventory rise while PINS is negative at -76.07%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
129.29%
Lower AP growth vs. PINS's 484.12%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
348.82%
Some yoy usage while PINS is negative at -3.04%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-58.65%
Negative yoy while PINS is 10.27%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
33.37%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of PINS's 208.70%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-1.35%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -24.46%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-2746.15%
Negative yoy acquisition while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
10.68%
Purchases well above PINS's 18.31%. Michael Burry would see major cash outflow into securities vs. competitor’s approach, risking near-term FCF.
11.18%
We have some liquidation growth while PINS is negative at -7.46%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
85.96%
Growth well above PINS's 70.38%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
52.09%
Investing outflow well above PINS's 39.90%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
6.56%
Debt repayment growth of 6.56% 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.
-0.09%
We cut yoy buybacks while PINS is 812871.43%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.