PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
743.76 - 757.57
479.80 - 796.25
8.25M / 11.73M (Avg.)
27.40 | 27.58
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
24.62%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 334.38%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
5.88%
D&A growth well above PINS's 4.14%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-480.30%
Negative yoy deferred tax while PINS stands at 73.16%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-0.79%
Negative yoy SBC while PINS is 21.24%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
10650.00%
Slight usage while PINS is negative at -144.62%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
26.60%
AR growth while PINS is negative at -126.90%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
146.95%
Inventory growth of 146.95% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-129.03%
Both negative yoy AP, with PINS at -132.86%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
153.33%
Some yoy usage while PINS is negative at -202.63%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
500.00%
Well above PINS's 649.10%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
16.60%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -42.90%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-42.08%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -51.05%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-8.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-90.54%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -11.47%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
-9.90%
Both yoy lines are negative, with PINS at -10.74%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
57.14%
Growth of 57.14% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-485.11%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -820.30%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
37.84%
Debt repayment growth of 37.84% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.