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.
2.25%
Net income growth under 50% of SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
4.83%
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.
125.62%
Deferred tax of 125.62% 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.
-1.66%
Negative yoy SBC while SNAP is 1.84%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-231.94%
Both reduce yoy usage, with SNAP at -100.00%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
131.30%
AR growth while SNAP is negative at -101.59%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
113.83%
Inventory growth of 113.83% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-44.69%
Both negative yoy AP, with SNAP at -374.96%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-195.45%
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.
-247.32%
Negative yoy while SNAP is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
-16.17%
Both yoy CFO lines are negative, with SNAP at -41.63%. Martin Whitman would suspect cyclical or cost factors harming the entire niche’s cash generation.
-3.99%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -73.86%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-2355.83%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
11.21%
Some yoy expansion while SNAP is negative at -74.24%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-37.27%
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.
250.10%
Growth of 250.10% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-351.89%
We reduce yoy invests while SNAP stands at 7722.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-0.08%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.