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
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
21.81%
Positive revenue growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
23.12%
Positive gross profit growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
46.23%
Positive EBIT growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
46.23%
Positive operating income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
80.89%
Positive net income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
-34.09%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-13.64%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
-2.58%
Both firms reduce share counts. Martin Whitman would compare buyback intensity relative to free cash flow generation.
4.93%
Slight or no buyback while SNAP is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
43.88%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
25.31%
Positive FCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
2378.98%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 10775.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
2378.98%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 155.85%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
2378.98%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 17.98%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
3724.00%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
3724.00%
5Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 30.40%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm’s strategy is more effective in generating mid-term profits.
3724.00%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 39.38%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
15.58%
AR growth well above SNAP's 0.63%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
16.66%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
20.09%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-31.13%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
-9.18%
Both reduce R&D yoy. Martin Whitman sees an industry shifting to cost reduction or limited breakthroughs in the near term.
0.88%
SG&A declining or stable vs. SNAP's 2.97%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.