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.
-5.04%
Negative revenue growth while PINS stands at 16.75%. Joel Greenblatt would look for strategic missteps or cyclical reasons.
-2.91%
Negative gross profit growth while PINS is at 21.27%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
-1.07%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-1.07%
Negative operating income growth while PINS is at 87.79%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
1.74%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 334.38%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.63%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 335.66%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
0.19%
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.
0.26%
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.
1.43%
Positive OCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
11.13%
Positive FCF growth while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
504.57%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 310.48%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
118.84%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 217.57%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
56.18%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 46.66%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
600.68%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 424.98%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
143.29%
Below 50% of PINS's 592.95%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
111.59%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 69.25%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
384.58%
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.
76.72%
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.
52.95%
Below 50% of PINS's 188.03%. Michael Burry suspects a steep short-term disadvantage in bottom-line expansion.
605.92%
Equity/share CAGR of 605.92% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
121.08%
5Y equity/share CAGR is in line with PINS's 118.78%. Walter Schloss would see parallel mid-term profitability and retention policies.
53.79%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to PINS's 50.13%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
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.
-8.87%
Firm’s AR is declining while PINS shows 7.06%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
4.48%
Inventory growth of 4.48% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
3.14%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x PINS's 2.28%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
4.06%
BV/share growth above 1.5x PINS's 2.58%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
0.05%
We have some new debt while PINS reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
8.83%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 8.43%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-13.56%
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.