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.
33.97%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 349.10%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
10.66%
D&A growth well above PINS's 6.39%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
570.00%
Deferred tax of 570.00% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-6.63%
Both cut yoy SBC, with PINS at -43.98%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-980.45%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -3023.87%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-219.84%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PINS at -407.43%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-129.32%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with PINS at -35.92%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
259.46%
A yoy AP increase while PINS is negative at -66.87%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-122.98%
Negative yoy usage while PINS is 10.19%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-733.33%
Negative yoy while PINS is 147.05%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
2.51%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -47.99%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-30.60%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -12.52%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-90.28%
Negative yoy acquisition while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
54.35%
Purchases well above PINS's 29.08%. Michael Burry would see major cash outflow into securities vs. competitor’s approach, risking near-term FCF.
-25.67%
We reduce yoy sales while PINS is 5.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
-600.00%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -110.52%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
11.75%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. PINS's 6284.80%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
17.76%
Buyback growth below 50% of PINS's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.