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.
-4.67%
Negative revenue growth while PINS stands at 16.75%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.50%
Negative gross profit growth while PINS is at 21.27%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
1.09%
Positive EBIT growth while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
1.09%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 87.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
-26.11%
Negative net income growth while PINS stands at 334.38%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-25.71%
Negative EPS growth while PINS is at 334.09%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-25.71%
Negative diluted EPS growth while PINS is at 335.66%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.29%
Share count expansion well above PINS's 0.05%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.15%
Diluted share count expanding well above PINS's 0.07%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.98%
Positive OCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
31.18%
Positive FCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
973.53%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 310.48%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
137.85%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 217.57%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
54.90%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 46.66%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
876.53%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 424.98%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
139.11%
Below 50% of PINS's 592.95%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
71.15%
3Y OCF/share CAGR similar to PINS's 69.25%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from a rising tide or parallel expansions.
644.16%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 166.88% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
67.88%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 133.35%. Martin Whitman might see a shortfall in operational efficiency or brand power.
16.21%
Below 50% of PINS's 188.03%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
2373.53%
Equity/share CAGR of 2373.53% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
164.51%
5Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 118.78%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms if reinvested profits or buybacks explain the superior buildup.
67.91%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 50.13%. Bruce Berkowitz confirms timely buybacks or margin improvements drive stronger near-term equity growth.
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.
-4.97%
Firm’s AR is declining while PINS shows 7.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
-35.93%
Inventory is declining while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
1.73%
Asset growth at 75-90% of PINS's 2.28%. Bill Ackman suggests reviewing opportunities to match or surpass the competitor's asset expansion if profitable.
3.48%
1.25-1.5x PINS's 2.58%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's capital management strategies surpass the competitor's approach.
-0.04%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-2.13%
Our R&D shrinks while PINS invests at 8.43%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-6.75%
We cut SG&A while PINS invests at 22.36%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.