PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
238.00 - 242.07
140.53 - 242.25
26.77M / 38.44M (Avg.)
25.64 | 9.39
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-34.20%
Negative net income growth while SNAP stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
29.14%
D&A growth well above SNAP's 6.12%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-218.47%
Both reduce yoy usage, with SNAP at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
100.00%
AR growth while SNAP is negative at -101.59%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
100.00%
Inventory growth of 100.00% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
100.00%
A yoy AP increase while SNAP is negative at -374.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-142.69%
Negative yoy usage while SNAP is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
336.54%
Well above SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
46.22%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -41.63%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
19.13%
Some CapEx rise while SNAP is negative at -73.86%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
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.
100.00%
Growth of 100.00% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-596.66%
We reduce yoy invests while SNAP stands at 7722.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-100.00%
We cut yoy buybacks while SNAP is 5.30%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.