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.
3.47%
Positive revenue growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
4.04%
Positive gross profit growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
3.48%
Positive EBIT growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
3.48%
Positive operating income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
-2.93%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-3.85%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
0.38%
Slight or no buybacks while SNAP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.17%
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.
28.15%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
45.70%
Positive FCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
1743.84%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 10775.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
170.35%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to SNAP's 155.85%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
68.74%
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.
2693.48%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 171.11%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
227.25%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to SNAP's 214.88%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
52.64%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 169.50%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
3329.71%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
111.18%
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.
27.70%
3Y net income/share CAGR 50-75% of SNAP's 39.38%. Martin Whitman might see a lagging edge in short-term profitability vs. the competitor.
7518.50%
Equity/share CAGR of 7518.50% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
183.61%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
75.80%
Positive short-term equity growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a strong advantage in near-term net worth buildup.
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.
6.31%
AR growth well above SNAP's 0.63%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
-13.06%
Inventory is declining while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential cost and margin benefits if sales hold up.
4.36%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.01%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-16.05%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
5.27%
We increase R&D while SNAP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
3.95%
SG&A growth well above SNAP's 2.97%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.