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.
-17.80%
Negative net income growth while SNAP stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
43.37%
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.
-27.66%
Negative yoy deferred tax while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
40.98%
SBC growth well above SNAP's 1.84%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
23.13%
Slight usage while SNAP is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
95.01%
AR growth while SNAP is negative at -101.59%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
533.33%
Inventory growth of 533.33% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
22.09%
A yoy AP increase while SNAP is negative at -374.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
-38.33%
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.
31.64%
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.
6.52%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -41.63%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
8.65%
Some CapEx rise while SNAP is negative at -73.86%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-110.31%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-45.76%
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.
-8.13%
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.
-66.17%
We reduce yoy other investing while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-690.42%
We reduce yoy invests while SNAP stands at 7722.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
25.87%
Debt repayment growth of 25.87% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.