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.
-3.21%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-2.58%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-5.78%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-5.78%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
22.88%
Positive net income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
19.05%
Positive EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
25.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
2.10%
Slight or no buybacks while SNAP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
1.99%
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.
4.39%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
23.26%
Positive FCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
223.71%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 10775.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
223.71%
5Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 155.85%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if cost efficiency or pricing power supports this advantage.
223.71%
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.
252.27%
10Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 171.11%. Bruce Berkowitz would confirm if the firm's long-term capital allocation yields better cash returns.
252.27%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 214.88%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
252.27%
3Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 169.50%. Bruce Berkowitz might see if strategic cost controls or product mix drove recent gains.
159.38%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
159.38%
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.
159.38%
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.
-9.29%
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.
6.33%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.96%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-17.65%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
11.52%
We increase R&D while SNAP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-7.78%
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.