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.
6.59%
Positive revenue growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
15.06%
Positive gross profit growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
150.74%
Positive EBIT growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
150.74%
Positive operating income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
62.42%
Positive net income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
70.81%
Positive EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
70.81%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
28.79%
Slight or no buybacks while SNAP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
28.79%
Slight or no buyback while SNAP is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3.31%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
146.20%
Positive FCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
34.25%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 10775.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
34.25%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 155.85%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
34.25%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 17.98%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
-55.09%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while SNAP stands at 171.11%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-55.09%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while SNAP is at 214.88%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-55.09%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SNAP stands at 169.50%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-126.38%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-126.38%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SNAP is 30.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-126.38%
Negative 3Y CAGR while SNAP is 39.38%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
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.
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.
4.98%
AR growth well above SNAP's 0.63%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
7.44%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
-17.31%
Both erode book value/share. Martin Whitman suspects a difficult environment or poor capital deployment for both players.
27.76%
We have some new debt while SNAP reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-65.39%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
-62.69%
We cut SG&A while SNAP invests at 2.97%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.