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.
11.36%
Net income growth under 50% of SNAP's 38.36%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
7.47%
D&A growth well above SNAP's 2.43%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
66.08%
Deferred tax of 66.08% 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.
-0.32%
Negative yoy SBC while SNAP is 0.35%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
28.10%
Less working capital growth vs. SNAP's 58.56%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
53.19%
AR growth while SNAP is negative at -40.70%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-66.62%
Negative yoy AP while SNAP is 72.96%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
23.71%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. SNAP's 154.74%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
-103.45%
Both negative yoy, with SNAP at -64.71%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
15.23%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of SNAP's 642.04%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
0.95%
Lower CapEx growth vs. SNAP's 15.41%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
-10488.46%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
1.12%
Less growth in investment purchases vs. SNAP's 9.24%, preserving near-term liquidity. David Dodd would confirm no strategic investment opportunities are lost.
-31.15%
Both yoy lines are negative, with SNAP at -14.38%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting fewer sales or fewer maturities within the niche.
-1755.64%
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.
-547.64%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -3.97%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
178.72%
We repay more while SNAP is negative at -16.86%. John Neff notes advantage in lowering leverage if competitor is ramping up debt or repaying less.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
2.51%
Buyback growth below 50% of SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects fewer capital returns to shareholders vs. competitor, unless expansions hold higher ROI.