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.
-7.76%
Both firms have declining sales. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry slump or new disruptive entrants.
-11.64%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-25.88%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-25.88%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
16.85%
Positive net income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
17.01%
Positive EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
17.36%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-0.30%
Share reduction while SNAP is at 2.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.30%
Reduced diluted shares while SNAP is at 1.69%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.48%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-6.66%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1265.41%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 2710.00%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
590.20%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 2710.00%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
223.40%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 2710.00%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
1800.35%
Positive long-term OCF/share growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a structural advantage in sustained cash generation.
819.34%
Positive OCF/share growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a comparative advantage in operational cash viability.
342.72%
Positive 3Y OCF/share CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big short-term edge in operational efficiency.
1685.31%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
1832.70%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
838.17%
Positive short-term CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
452.07%
Equity/share CAGR of 452.07% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
98.19%
Equity/share CAGR of 98.19% 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.
-12.29%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.23%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.72%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
14.83%
We increase R&D while SNAP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
14.17%
SG&A growth well above SNAP's 1.73%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.