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.
36.42%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 83.25%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
3.92%
Some D&A expansion while PINS is negative at -18.37%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-83.39%
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.
33.07%
SBC growth well above PINS's 18.52%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
37.34%
Slight usage while PINS is negative at -159.69%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-155.93%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with PINS at -128.93%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
95.38%
A yoy AP increase while PINS is negative at -20.24%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
343.40%
Growth well above PINS's 94.87%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-41.81%
Both negative yoy, with PINS at -88.83%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
23.65%
Some CFO growth while PINS is negative at -65.81%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
9.15%
Lower CapEx growth vs. PINS's 59.30%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
81.31%
Less M&A spending yoy vs. PINS's 297.05%, reducing near-term risk. David Dodd would confirm the firm is not missing out on a strategic deal that competitor might exploit.
-743.53%
Negative yoy purchasing while PINS stands at 2.67%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
240.07%
We have some liquidation growth while PINS is negative at -16.35%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
-103.19%
Both yoy lines negative, with PINS at -297.05%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
22.84%
We have mild expansions while PINS is negative at -330.45%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
16.67%
Debt repayment growth of 16.67% 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.
90.41%
We have some buyback growth while PINS is negative at -211.97%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.