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.
15.77%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 334.38%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
1.03%
Less D&A growth vs. PINS's 4.14%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
124.68%
Well above PINS's 73.16% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
1.74%
Less SBC growth vs. PINS's 21.24%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
-33.52%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -144.62%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
48.58%
AR growth while PINS is negative at -126.90%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-99.40%
Negative yoy inventory while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
143.90%
A yoy AP increase while PINS is negative at -132.86%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-100.56%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -202.63%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
-33.33%
Negative yoy while PINS is 649.10%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
11.85%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -42.90%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-10.05%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -51.05%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-221.05%
Negative yoy acquisition while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-18.80%
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.
129.55%
We have some liquidation growth while PINS is negative at -10.74%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
-80.49%
We reduce yoy other investing while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
37.30%
We have mild expansions while PINS is negative at -820.30%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
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.