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.
20.45%
Net income growth under 50% of SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-3.46%
Negative yoy D&A while SNAP is 6.12%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
111.66%
Deferred tax of 111.66% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-13.09%
Negative yoy SBC while SNAP is 1.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-80.63%
Both reduce yoy usage, with SNAP at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-344.21%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SNAP at -101.59%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-42.19%
Negative yoy inventory while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
174.85%
A yoy AP increase while SNAP is negative at -374.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-11.58%
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.
36.69%
Lower 'other non-cash' growth vs. SNAP's 100.00%, indicating steadier reported figures. David Dodd would confirm no missed necessary write-downs or gains.
0.20%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -41.63%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-18.79%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -73.86%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-94.26%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-6.72%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -74.24%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
-22.69%
We reduce yoy sales while SNAP is 163.45%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-82.88%
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.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.