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.
11.10%
Revenue growth under 50% of SNAP's 27.62%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
12.54%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SNAP's 50.45%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
8.69%
EBIT growth below 50% of SNAP's 46.87%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
8.69%
Operating income growth under 50% of SNAP's 36.59%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
9.45%
Net income growth under 50% of SNAP's 47.13%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
9.88%
EPS growth under 50% of SNAP's 48.42%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
9.39%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of SNAP's 48.42%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.03%
Share reduction while SNAP is at 3.04%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.10%
Reduced diluted shares while SNAP is at 3.04%. 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.
8.20%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
8.33%
Positive FCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
2673.42%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 8496.59%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
357.29%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 798.85%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
123.81%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of SNAP's 213.39%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
8665.64%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 12.08%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
319.24%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 50.47%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
114.16%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 57.56%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
3597.09%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 11.87% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
362.24%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 14.01%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
107.31%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 64.08%. 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.
177.69%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 11.74%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
77.34%
Positive short-term equity growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
13.84%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SNAP's 30.09%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
4.33%
Asset growth well under 50% of SNAP's 34.83%. Michael Burry sees the competitor as far more aggressive in building resources or capacity.
3.45%
Under 50% of SNAP's 65.42%. Michael Burry raises concerns about the firm’s ability to build intrinsic value relative to its rival.
3.38%
Debt shrinking faster vs. SNAP's 13.01%. David Dodd sees a safer balance sheet if it doesn't impair future growth.
17.30%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SNAP's 6.34%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
16.80%
SG&A growth well above SNAP's 15.04%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.