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
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
26.61%
Revenue growth above 1.5x PINS's 16.75%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
14.04%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of PINS's 21.27%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
-36.06%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-36.06%
Negative operating income growth while PINS is at 87.79%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-37.83%
Negative net income growth while PINS stands at 334.38%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-17.39%
Negative EPS growth while PINS is at 334.09%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-17.39%
Negative diluted EPS growth while PINS is at 335.66%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
-24.95%
Share reduction while PINS is at 0.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-26.21%
Reduced diluted shares while PINS is at 0.07%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
106.25%
Positive OCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
121.21%
Positive FCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
171.62%
10Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 310.48%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm’s offerings lag behind the competitor.
171.62%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of PINS's 217.57%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
171.62%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 46.66%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-39.79%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while PINS is at 166.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-39.79%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while PINS is 133.35%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-39.79%
Negative 3Y CAGR while PINS is 188.03%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
340.20%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 8.43%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.