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.
-14.54%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with SNAP at -6.94%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
-2.35%
Negative yoy D&A while SNAP is 22.88%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
6.98%
Deferred tax of 6.98% 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.
4.04%
SBC growth while SNAP is negative at -22.19%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
90.94%
Well above SNAP's 103.79% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
146.53%
AR growth well above SNAP's 70.35%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-252.34%
Negative yoy inventory while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-172.51%
Negative yoy AP while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
124.62%
Some yoy usage while SNAP is negative at -32.73%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
111.04%
Well above SNAP's 131.64%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
19.38%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x SNAP's 9.67%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-15.62%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -158.77%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-525.00%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-13.26%
Negative yoy purchasing while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
9.34%
Liquidation growth of 9.34% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
69.33%
Growth of 69.33% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-13.81%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -4585.54%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
99.82%
Debt repayment growth of 99.82% 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.
-17.87%
We cut yoy buybacks while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.