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.
-8.01%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-11.96%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-28.68%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-28.68%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
404.65%
Positive net income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
200.00%
Positive EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
200.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-6.94%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
-0.28%
Both reduce diluted shares. Martin Whitman would review each firm’s ability to continue repurchases and manage option issuance.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.58%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-18.84%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
97.83%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 10775.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
97.83%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of SNAP's 155.85%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
97.83%
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.
106.71%
10Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SNAP's 171.11%. Martin Whitman might fear a structural deficiency in operational efficiency.
106.71%
Below 50% of SNAP's 214.88%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
106.71%
3Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SNAP's 169.50%. Martin Whitman would suspect weaker recent execution or product competitiveness.
-7.63%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-7.63%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while SNAP is 30.40%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-7.63%
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.
-8.34%
Firm’s AR is declining while SNAP shows 0.63%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.40%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
8.08%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-4.16%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-1.35%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
3.27%
SG&A growth well above SNAP's 2.97%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.