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.
11.20%
Positive revenue growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
11.94%
Positive gross profit growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
25.85%
Positive EBIT growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
25.85%
Positive operating income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
27.49%
Positive net income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
21.43%
Positive EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
30.77%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.93%
Slight or no buybacks while SNAP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
1.04%
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.
-28.14%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-36.81%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
106.76%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 10775.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
106.76%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of SNAP's 155.85%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
106.76%
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.
64.51%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 171.11%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
64.51%
Below 50% of SNAP's 214.88%. Michael Burry would be alarmed about sustained underperformance in generating free operational cash.
64.51%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 169.50%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
81.89%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
81.89%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 30.40%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
81.89%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 39.38%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
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.
11.51%
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.
-5.03%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
4.68%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-73.47%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
7.27%
We increase R&D while SNAP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-8.60%
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.