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
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
12.00%
Revenue growth below 50% of PINS's 29.39%. Michael Burry would check for competitive disadvantage risks.
17.44%
Cost growth less than half of PINS's 43.04%. David Dodd would verify if cost advantage is structural.
10.75%
Gross profit growth below 50% of PINS's 21.54%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-1.12%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
15.91%
R&D growth less than half of PINS's 1006.89%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
-20.67%
G&A reduction while PINS shows 826.17% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency advantage.
19.50%
Marketing expense growth less than half of PINS's 288.67%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
60.61%
Other expenses change of 60.61% while PINS maintains costs. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate efficiency.
0.10%
Operating expenses growth less than half of PINS's 664.54%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
4.25%
Total costs growth less than half of PINS's 478.91%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
10.61%
Interest expense growth while PINS reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
10.85%
Similar D&A growth to PINS's 14.24%. Walter Schloss would investigate industry patterns.
5.94%
EBITDA growth while PINS declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-5.41%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
4.89%
Operating income growth while PINS declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-6.35%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
24.85%
Other expenses growth less than half of PINS's 115.76%. David Dodd would verify if advantage is sustainable.
38.77%
Pre-tax income growth while PINS declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
23.90%
Pre-tax margin growth while PINS declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
110.45%
Tax expense growth while PINS reduces burden. John Neff would investigate differences.
7.70%
Net income growth while PINS declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-3.84%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
8.24%
EPS growth while PINS declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
7.06%
Diluted EPS growth while PINS declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
0.60%
Share count increase while PINS reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.
0.21%
Diluted share increase while PINS reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.