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.
-13.07%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with PINS at -51.32%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
3.77%
Less D&A growth vs. PINS's 15.26%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
10.57%
Deferred tax of 10.57% 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.
4.06%
Less SBC growth vs. PINS's 15.97%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
118.88%
Slight usage while PINS is negative at -108.52%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
95.07%
AR growth well above PINS's 100.57%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
58.78%
A yoy AP increase while PINS is negative at -31.31%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
70.60%
Some yoy usage while PINS is negative at -284.08%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
40.07%
Some yoy increase while PINS is negative at -118.35%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
20.24%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -35.49%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-6.56%
Negative yoy CapEx while PINS is 38.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-431.42%
Negative yoy acquisition while PINS stands at 74.79%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
21.63%
Some yoy expansion while PINS is negative at -50.66%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
11.71%
Below 50% of PINS's 83.43%. Michael Burry would see minimal near-term inflows vs. competitor’s liquidation approach.
257.92%
Growth well above PINS's 182.93%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
80.11%
Investing outflow well above PINS's 110.92%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
-19.80%
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.
-1.28%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -59.15%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.