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.
5.63%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 28.65%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
6.70%
Some D&A expansion while PINS is negative at -27.76%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-55.14%
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.
26.97%
SBC growth while PINS is negative at -23.30%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-284.65%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -107.28%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-105.96%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PINS at -97.47%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-786.68%
Both reduce yoy inventory, with PINS at -141.98%. Martin Whitman would find a widespread caution or cyclical demand drop in the niche.
-27.27%
Negative yoy AP while PINS is 174.28%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-800.59%
Both reduce yoy usage, with PINS at -2.78%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
616.67%
Some yoy increase while PINS is negative at -59.84%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-64.75%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with PINS at -163.75%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
8.52%
Lower CapEx growth vs. PINS's 38.33%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
-927.27%
Negative yoy acquisition while PINS stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
21.63%
Less growth in investment purchases vs. PINS's 80.19%, preserving near-term liquidity. David Dodd would confirm no strategic investment opportunities are lost.
-21.15%
Both yoy lines are negative, with PINS at -33.77%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-483.33%
We reduce yoy other investing while PINS is 51265.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-1.65%
We reduce yoy invests while PINS stands at 173.18%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-9.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while PINS is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-9.44%
We cut yoy buybacks while PINS is 70.98%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.