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.
187.70%
Net income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 7.97%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
11.40%
D&A growth well above SNAP's 10.59%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
733.09%
Some yoy growth while SNAP is negative at -829.41%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
-7.58%
Both cut yoy SBC, with SNAP at -18.91%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-103.79%
Negative yoy working capital usage while SNAP is 116.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-114.74%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SNAP at -35.24%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-71.59%
Negative yoy inventory while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
317.93%
AP growth well above SNAP's 121.59%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
1.18%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. SNAP's 337.23%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
-41.25%
Negative yoy while SNAP is 743.95%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
30.38%
Operating cash flow growth similar to SNAP's 33.51%. Walter Schloss would see parallel improvements or market conditions in cash generation.
3.56%
Lower CapEx growth vs. SNAP's 24.69%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
90.22%
Acquisition growth of 90.22% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-0.60%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -6.39%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
-43.33%
Both yoy lines are negative, with SNAP at -3.12%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
5.26%
Less 'other investing' outflow yoy vs. SNAP's 100.00%. David Dodd would see a stronger short-term cash position unless competitor invests more wisely.
-208.48%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -27.31%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
80.79%
Debt repayment growth of 80.79% 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.
-7.21%
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.