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.
-64.71%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with PINS at -188.10%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
10.61%
D&A growth well above PINS's 4.63%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-8.96%
Negative yoy deferred tax while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
4.02%
SBC growth while PINS is negative at -68.14%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
374.43%
Well above PINS's 193.83% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
168.41%
AR growth well above PINS's 172.91%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
2653.37%
Some inventory rise while PINS is negative at -230.37%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
-172.18%
Negative yoy AP while PINS is 825.87%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
2411.03%
Growth well above PINS's 30.02%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
131.58%
Some yoy increase while PINS is negative at -529.87%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
21.13%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of PINS's 275.97%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
12.12%
CapEx growth well above PINS's 18.69%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
63.50%
Acquisition growth of 63.50% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-230.65%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -24.67%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
41.25%
We have some liquidation growth while PINS is negative at -19.50%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
-138.10%
We reduce yoy other investing while PINS is 76.80%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-80.53%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -108.50%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
82.49%
Buyback growth of 82.49% while PINS is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.