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.
14.38%
Some net income increase while SNAP is negative at -22.90%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
118.36%
Some D&A expansion while SNAP is negative at -20.28%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
125.09%
Deferred tax of 125.09% 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.
-6.98%
Both cut yoy SBC, with SNAP at -20.84%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
76.02%
Less working capital growth vs. SNAP's 1712.21%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
148.59%
AR growth well above SNAP's 205.40%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-100.00%
Negative yoy inventory while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-597.42%
Both negative yoy AP, with SNAP at -124.27%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
65.06%
Some yoy usage while SNAP is negative at -551.05%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
225.76%
Some yoy increase while SNAP is negative at -117.82%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
52.51%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -46.31%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-9.01%
Negative yoy CapEx while SNAP is 6.09%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-110.34%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
25.26%
Some yoy expansion while SNAP is negative at -7718.54%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
-26.10%
Both yoy lines are negative, with SNAP at -43.82%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
253.03%
Growth well above SNAP's 100.38%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-38.87%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -121.05%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
43.13%
Debt repayment growth of 43.13% 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.
3.06%
We have some buyback growth while SNAP is negative at -24.14%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.