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.
16.39%
Revenue growth of 16.39% while PINS is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would check if a small edge can widen further.
8.61%
Gross profit growth of 8.61% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minimal improvements could expand further.
-1.52%
Negative EBIT growth while PINS is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on core profitability.
-1.52%
Negative operating income growth while PINS is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would press for urgent turnaround measures.
-144.86%
Negative net income growth while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a reevaluation of cost or revenue strategies.
-144.90%
Negative EPS growth while PINS is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-145.83%
Negative diluted EPS growth while PINS is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.14%
Share change of 0.14% while PINS is at zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if slight buybacks (or dilution) matter in the bigger picture.
-1.29%
Reduced diluted shares while PINS is at 0.00%. 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.
4.01%
OCF growth of 4.01% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
-5.89%
Negative FCF growth while PINS is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
499.60%
10Y CAGR of 499.60% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
132.08%
5Y CAGR of 132.08% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
74.61%
3Y CAGR of 74.61% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
442.96%
OCF/share CAGR of 442.96% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
108.66%
OCF/share CAGR of 108.66% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
57.79%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 57.79% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
-324.13%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while PINS is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-199.29%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-162.09%
Negative 3Y CAGR while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
501.80%
Equity/share CAGR of 501.80% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
101.77%
Equity/share CAGR of 101.77% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
42.72%
Equity/share CAGR of 42.72% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
20.08%
AR growth of 20.08% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
-2.09%
Inventory is declining while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.09%
Asset growth of 4.09% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
-3.06%
We have a declining book value while PINS shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
0.13%
Debt growth of 0.13% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
2.40%
R&D growth of 2.40% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if the moderate investment leads to meaningful product differentiation.
31.25%
SG&A growth of 31.25% while PINS is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees more spend on admin or marketing, expecting stronger top-line in return.