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.
6.71%
Revenue growth at 50-75% of SNAP's 11.32%. Martin Whitman would worry about competitiveness or product relevance.
7.22%
Gross profit growth at 50-75% of SNAP's 10.86%. Martin Whitman would question if cost structure or brand is lagging.
47.54%
EBIT growth above 1.5x SNAP's 0.83%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
47.54%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 6.00%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
48.73%
Net income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 2.40%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
48.51%
EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 4.17%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
47.32%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 4.17%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.31%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SNAP's 1.42%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
1.11%
Diluted share count expanding well above SNAP's 1.42%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
17.87%
OCF growth under 50% of SNAP's 115.60%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
24.93%
FCF growth 50-75% of SNAP's 48.98%. Martin Whitman would see if structural disadvantages exist in generating free cash.
1550.46%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 3118.13%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
181.29%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of SNAP's 221.66%. Bill Ackman would encourage strategies to match competitor’s pace.
78.49%
3Y revenue/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 57.95%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better product or regional expansions than the competitor.
1992.69%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 105.94%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
207.78%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 107.77%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
132.98%
3Y OCF/share CAGR similar to SNAP's 121.02%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from a rising tide or parallel expansions.
2574.63%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
154.98%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 8.75%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
65.68%
Positive short-term CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
966.99%
Equity/share CAGR of 966.99% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
101.10%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
36.20%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 2.26%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
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.
3.46%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SNAP's 12.09%, 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.
4.64%
Asset growth above 1.5x SNAP's 0.74%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
6.26%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.00%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-1.10%
Our R&D shrinks while SNAP invests at 3.54%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
-32.40%
We cut SG&A while SNAP invests at 4.19%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.