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.
15.93%
Some net income increase while SNAP is negative at -10.82%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
8.68%
Less D&A growth vs. SNAP's 18.76%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-112.08%
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.
0.60%
SBC growth while SNAP is negative at -14.37%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
831.98%
Slight usage while SNAP is negative at -6220.53%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-202.08%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SNAP at -135.74%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
164.55%
Inventory growth of 164.55% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
117.84%
A yoy AP increase while SNAP is negative at -710.64%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
382.35%
Some yoy usage while SNAP is negative at -266.28%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-88.08%
Negative yoy while SNAP is 9.99%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
19.09%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -44.92%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
12.56%
Some CapEx rise while SNAP is negative at -31.87%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
-11.76%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-19.85%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -483.09%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
15.98%
Liquidation growth of 15.98% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
58.75%
Growth well above SNAP's 96.13%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-14.86%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -236.13%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-17266.67%
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.
23.98%
Buyback growth of 23.98% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.