Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. PINS scored 59.3, CARG scored 82.4 — CARG leads.
Compare another set
PINS
Pinterest, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
59.3
$21.40 · $12.1B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
23.1
CARG leads
CARG
CarGurus, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
82.4
$28.85 · $2.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestCARG15.3x
Fastest growthPINS+16.6%
Strongest balance sheetPINS0.41
Highest qualityCARG86 / 100
Largest discount to fair valuePINS-58%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
PINS
stronger →← stronger
CARG
62
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
86
90
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
82
37
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
79
CARG is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
PINS
CARG
$1.3bC+
FCF
$291mC
+16.6%B+
Rev
+13.7%B+
0.41B+
D/E
0.70B
61.1xC
P/E
15.3xB+
0.27A
PEG
0.63A-
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
PINS
CARG
58% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
44% below
~-9%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-5%/yr
+95%
1-yr DCF upside
+57%
+136%
5-yr DCF upside
+78%
+212%
10-yr DCF upside
+112%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
PINS
No notable signals flagged.
CARG
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
PINSPinterest, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $21.40 · beta 0.90
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $12.1b. Down 40% from 52-week high of $35.42 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +17%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.27 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 35 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $29.05 (implying +36% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income, mostly because of stock-based pay ($1.0b) — a real cost to shareholders, paid in shares rather than cash.
Risk
Trailing P/E 61.1x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 40% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
CARGCarGurus, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $28.85 · beta 1.22
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $2.6b. Down 30% from 52-week high of $41.22 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +14%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.63 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $41.27 (implying +43% upside).
Moat
Net margin 18% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 53% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 156% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Down 30% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where PINS and CARG diverge
On the headline score the gap is 23.1 points in favor of CARG. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValuePINS 37.2 · CARG 79.1CARG +41.9
QualityPINS 62.5 · CARG 86.2CARG +23.7
GrowthPINS 90.0 · CARG 82.1PINS +7.9
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is CARG or PINS the better stock?
CARG scores higher: CARG 82.4, PINS 59.3 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do CARG and PINS differ most?
The widest gap is value, where CARG leads by 42 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are CARG and PINS scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.