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.
-13.07%
Negative net income growth while SNAP stands at 14.82%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
3.77%
Some D&A expansion while SNAP is negative at -54.23%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
10.57%
Deferred tax of 10.57% 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.
4.06%
SBC growth well above SNAP's 7.57%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
118.88%
Well above SNAP's 183.64% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
95.07%
AR growth well above SNAP's 121.49%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
58.78%
Lower AP growth vs. SNAP's 339.37%, indicating prompt payments. David Dodd would confirm no lost opportunity in interest-free credit if expansions are underfunded.
70.60%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. SNAP's 320.73%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
40.07%
Some yoy increase while SNAP is negative at -462.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
20.24%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of SNAP's 145.09%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-6.56%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -61.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-431.42%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -75.13%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
21.63%
Some yoy expansion while SNAP is negative at -44.16%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
11.71%
Below 50% of SNAP's 55.26%. Michael Burry would see minimal near-term inflows vs. competitor’s liquidation approach.
257.92%
Growth of 257.92% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
80.11%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. SNAP's 468.80%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
-19.80%
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.
-1.28%
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.