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.
-25.60%
Both yoy net incomes decline, with SNAP at -61.95%. Martin Whitman would view it as a broader sector or cyclical slump hitting profits.
1.28%
Less D&A growth vs. SNAP's 2.81%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-232.73%
Negative yoy deferred tax while SNAP stands at 48.05%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
22.90%
SBC growth well above SNAP's 33.49%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
120.81%
Well above SNAP's 177.74% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
140.60%
AR growth well above SNAP's 176.91%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-122.34%
Negative yoy inventory while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-154.91%
Both negative yoy AP, with SNAP at -72.18%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
478.16%
Some yoy usage while SNAP is negative at -422.81%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
21.21%
Some yoy increase while SNAP is negative at -317.65%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-7.60%
Negative yoy CFO while SNAP is 47.50%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
34.50%
CapEx growth well above SNAP's 48.05%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
-153.85%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-58.21%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -56.75%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
50.88%
We have some liquidation growth while SNAP is negative at -10.32%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
17.24%
We have some outflow growth while SNAP is negative at -99.74%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
21.64%
We have mild expansions while SNAP is negative at -149.82%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-500.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
-100.00%
Negative yoy issuance while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
-14.15%
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.