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.
12.54%
Revenue growth under 50% of PINS's 28.57%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
12.13%
Gross profit growth under 50% of PINS's 35.62%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
11.03%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 4025.79%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
11.03%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 4025.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
5.07%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 2887.94%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
5.73%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 2870.30%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
5.81%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 2859.18%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.74%
Share reduction while PINS is at 0.71%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.74%
Reduced diluted shares while PINS is at 1.15%. 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.
-38.30%
Negative OCF growth while PINS is at 138.04%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-65.06%
Negative FCF growth while PINS is at 136.22%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
449.10%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 6.47%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
144.69%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to PINS's 139.09%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
64.13%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 27.55%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
287.29%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 485.93%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
62.17%
Below 50% of PINS's 1013.35%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
-9.75%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while PINS stands at 135.27%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
557.19%
Net income/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 1011.63%. Martin Whitman might question if the firm’s product or cost base lags behind.
157.43%
5Y net income/share CAGR at 75-90% of PINS's 184.82%. Bill Ackman would advocate improvements to match competitor’s profit expansion.
46.99%
Positive short-term CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
248.10%
Positive growth while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
77.64%
Below 50% of PINS's 251.22%. Michael Burry sees a substantially weaker mid-term book value expansion strategy in place.
37.77%
3Y equity/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 26.42%. 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.
16.93%
AR growth well above PINS's 22.26%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-100.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
1.43%
Asset growth well under 50% of PINS's 8.77%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
4.50%
Under 50% of PINS's 9.35%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
8.25%
Debt growth far above PINS's 14.88%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
7.59%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 1.24%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
18.98%
SG&A growth well above PINS's 1.93%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.