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.
-6.77%
Both companies show declining revenue. Martin Whitman would check for industry-wide issues.
-1.52%
Cost reduction while PINS shows 3.45% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive advantage.
-7.97%
Both companies show declining gross profit. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-1.28%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-0.21%
R&D reduction while PINS shows 4.90% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive risk.
1.44%
G&A growth while PINS reduces overhead. John Neff would investigate operational differences.
-13.32%
Marketing expense reduction while PINS shows 7.91% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive risk.
-63.37%
Other expenses reduction while PINS shows 0.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
-4.21%
Operating expenses reduction while PINS shows 0.87% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-3.29%
Total costs reduction while PINS shows 1.53% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-13.24%
Interest expense reduction while PINS shows 0.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
5.85%
D&A growth while PINS reduces D&A. John Neff would investigate differences.
-8.80%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-2.17%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-10.94%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-4.47%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-55.36%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
-11.89%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-5.49%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
9.26%
Tax expense growth while PINS reduces burden. John Neff would investigate differences.
-15.35%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-9.20%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-15.23%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-14.95%
Both companies show declining diluted EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-0.42%
Share count reduction while PINS shows 1.68% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-0.38%
Both companies reducing diluted shares. Martin Whitman would check patterns.