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.
14.08%
Revenue growth similar to SNAP's 14.97%. Walter Schloss would see if both companies share industry tailwinds.
16.79%
Positive gross profit growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
36.44%
EBIT growth of 36.44% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can be scaled further.
36.44%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 5.91%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
40.47%
Net income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 10.52%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
44.44%
EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 8.33%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
38.89%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 8.33%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.52%
Share count expansion well above SNAP's 0.56%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.49%
Diluted share change of 0.49% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.59%
OCF growth of 10.59% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
11.10%
FCF growth of 11.10% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
291.36%
10Y CAGR of 291.36% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
291.36%
5Y CAGR of 291.36% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
126.33%
3Y CAGR of 126.33% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
1162.91%
OCF/share CAGR of 1162.91% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
1162.91%
OCF/share CAGR of 1162.91% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
415.05%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 415.05% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
158.17%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 158.17% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
158.17%
Net income/share CAGR of 158.17% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
401.93%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 401.93% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
96.53%
Equity/share CAGR of 96.53% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
20.36%
AR growth of 20.36% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if the firm’s additional AR is warranted by strong revenue or potential risk.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.05%
Asset growth of 5.05% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
4.65%
BV/share growth of 4.65% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
-19.89%
We’re deleveraging while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
10.17%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SNAP's 1.99%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
4.14%
We expand SG&A while SNAP cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.