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.
4.29%
Revenue growth at 75-90% of PINS's 5.24%. Bill Ackman would push for innovation or market expansion to catch up.
5.42%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of PINS's 6.29%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
4.00%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 72.41%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
4.00%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 72.41%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
11.36%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 243.83%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
12.04%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 246.15%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
12.17%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 251.20%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.43%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.61%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
-0.02%
Dividend reduction while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s cash flow stability or capital allocation decisions.
15.23%
OCF growth under 50% of PINS's 133.05%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
31.09%
FCF growth under 50% of PINS's 140.17%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
488.63%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 212.32%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
145.77%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to PINS's 158.53%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
46.86%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x PINS's 34.72%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
464.32%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of PINS's 1389.42%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
123.82%
Below 50% of PINS's 2571.11%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
30.23%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 42.03%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
958.06%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 207.05% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
319.61%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 119.72%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
50.48%
Positive short-term CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
250.27%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 132.98%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
81.68%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 19.06%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
39.15%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 1.79%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
4.28%
AR growth well above PINS's 2.44%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.74%
Positive asset growth while PINS is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.89%
Positive BV/share change while PINS is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-6.26%
We’re deleveraging while PINS stands at 1.75%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
4.95%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 4.42%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
8.80%
SG&A growth well above PINS's 3.37%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.