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.
2.72%
Revenue growth under 50% of SNAP's 14.97%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
2.22%
Positive gross profit growth while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear operational edge over the competitor.
8.50%
EBIT growth of 8.50% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can be scaled further.
8.50%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 5.91%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
11.83%
Net income growth 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 10.52%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic cost cutting or product mix explains this difference.
-3.85%
Negative EPS growth while SNAP is at 8.33%. Joel Greenblatt would expect urgent managerial action on costs or revenue drivers.
-3.85%
Negative diluted EPS growth while SNAP is at 8.33%. Joel Greenblatt would require immediate efforts to restrain share issuance or boost net income.
0.33%
Share count expansion well above SNAP's 0.56%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.29%
Diluted share change of 0.29% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor difference that could widen over time.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
5.56%
OCF growth of 5.56% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can expand into a larger competitive lead.
21.14%
FCF growth of 21.14% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest improvements in free cash can accelerate further.
914.80%
10Y CAGR of 914.80% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if incremental growth can widen into a significant edge.
142.25%
5Y CAGR of 142.25% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small improvements can scale into a larger advantage.
38.63%
3Y CAGR of 38.63% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small gains can accelerate to a more decisive lead.
786.32%
OCF/share CAGR of 786.32% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that could compound over time.
212.23%
OCF/share CAGR of 212.23% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if modest momentum can translate into a bigger competitive lead.
56.91%
3Y OCF/share CAGR of 56.91% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see if small gains can expand into a broader advantage.
808.83%
10Y net income/share CAGR of 808.83% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if minor gains can compound into a bigger lead over time.
99.11%
Net income/share CAGR of 99.11% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz would see if small mid-term gains can develop into a bigger lead.
34.82%
3Y net income/share CAGR of 34.82% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor improvements can widen to a bigger advantage.
2140.75%
Equity/share CAGR of 2140.75% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
156.52%
Equity/share CAGR of 156.52% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
64.97%
Equity/share CAGR of 64.97% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if minor gains can snowball into a bigger lead soon.
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.
-2.82%
Firm’s AR is declining while SNAP shows 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
55.37%
Inventory growth of 55.37% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
4.05%
Asset growth of 4.05% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz checks if modest expansions can create a longer-term lead.
2.74%
BV/share growth of 2.74% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees if small growth can compound into a strong advantage.
-0.04%
We’re deleveraging while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
1.31%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SNAP's 1.99%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
-4.65%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.