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.
61.62%
Net income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 38.69%. David Dodd would see a clear bottom-line advantage if it is backed by stable operations.
2.72%
D&A growth well above SNAP's 4.20%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
123.01%
Well above SNAP's 44.00% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
-5.53%
Negative yoy SBC while SNAP is 3.17%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
-67.51%
Both reduce yoy usage, with SNAP at -373.80%. Martin Whitman would find an industry or cyclical factor prompting leaner operational approaches.
-4401.25%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SNAP at -1070.08%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
172.57%
Inventory growth of 172.57% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
187.67%
AP growth well above SNAP's 50.72%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
-76.40%
Negative yoy usage while SNAP is 166.54%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-23.06%
Negative yoy while SNAP is 75.39%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
21.51%
Operating cash flow growth 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 17.62%. Bruce Berkowitz might see better working capital management or consistent margin advantages.
-0.28%
Negative yoy CapEx while SNAP is 6.60%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
92.12%
Some acquisitions while SNAP is negative at -65.85%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pausing M&A or divesting while the firm invests in new deals.
-51.63%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -23.56%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
31.83%
Below 50% of SNAP's 73.08%. Michael Burry would see minimal near-term inflows vs. competitor’s liquidation approach.
-441.18%
We reduce yoy other investing while SNAP is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
-79.89%
We reduce yoy invests while SNAP stands at 23.75%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
-74.29%
We cut debt repayment yoy while SNAP is 100.00%. 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.
-15.25%
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.