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.
9.56%
Positive revenue growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
13.78%
Positive gross profit growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
18.13%
Positive EBIT growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
18.13%
Positive operating income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a competitive edge in operations.
73.68%
Positive net income growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a big relative performance advantage.
66.67%
Positive EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
75.00%
Positive diluted EPS growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
0.27%
Slight or no buybacks while SNAP is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.04%
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.
6.17%
Positive OCF growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
-21.36%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
1312.15%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 10775.36%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
153.49%
5Y revenue/share CAGR similar to SNAP's 155.85%. Walter Schloss might see both companies benefiting from the same mid-term trends.
63.36%
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.
1291.13%
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.
117.72%
5Y OCF/share CAGR at 50-75% of SNAP's 214.88%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags in monetizing revenue effectively.
54.89%
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.
1775.38%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
125.19%
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.
68.01%
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.
2770.71%
Equity/share CAGR of 2770.71% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
171.23%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
71.64%
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.
8.28%
AR growth well above SNAP's 0.63%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
373.84%
Inventory growth of 373.84% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
4.26%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
5.47%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
-0.04%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
5.95%
We increase R&D while SNAP cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
15.11%
SG&A growth well above SNAP's 2.97%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.