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
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
19.43%
Revenue growth under 50% of PINS's 42.97%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
21.34%
Gross profit growth under 50% of PINS's 54.77%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
23.28%
EBIT growth below 50% of PINS's 67.70%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
23.28%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 67.70%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
20.65%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 71.36%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
21.13%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 72.39%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
20.75%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 72.39%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.31%
Share reduction while PINS is at 2.98%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.10%
Reduced diluted shares while PINS is at 2.98%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-2.41%
Negative OCF growth while PINS is at 27.88%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-13.71%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1498.35%
Positive 10Y revenue/share CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a distinct advantage in product or market expansion over the competitor.
434.39%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
144.87%
Positive 3Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might view this as a sharp short-term edge or successful pivot strategy.
1427.15%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 117.12%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
460.10%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 117.12%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
88.51%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 75-90% of PINS's 117.12%. Bill Ackman would press for improvements in margin or overhead to catch up.
1986.63%
Positive 10Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
930.72%
Positive 5Y CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
111.22%
Positive short-term CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
1668.76%
Positive growth while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
173.28%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
74.67%
Positive short-term equity growth while PINS is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
24.05%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. PINS's 50.41%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.20%
Asset growth 1.25-1.5x PINS's 4.95%. Bruce Berkowitz sees if the firm's investments effectively outpace the competitor in future returns.
7.84%
BV/share growth above 1.5x PINS's 0.45%. David Dodd confirms if consistent profit retention or fewer write-downs yield faster equity creation.
13.05%
Debt growth far above PINS's 7.59%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
9.27%
We increase R&D while PINS cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
28.99%
SG&A growth well above PINS's 12.08%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.