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.
3.32%
Revenue growth under 50% of SNAP's 13.51%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
3.65%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SNAP's 41.65%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
183.25%
EBIT growth above 1.5x SNAP's 7.78%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
183.25%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 9.63%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
187.70%
Net income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 7.97%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
186.96%
EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 7.41%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
182.61%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 7.41%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
0.18%
Share reduction more than 1.5x SNAP's 1.16%. David Dodd would see if the company is taking advantage of undervaluation to retire shares.
0.09%
Diluted share reduction more than 1.5x SNAP's 1.16%. David Dodd would validate if the company is aggressively retiring shares or limiting option exercises.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
30.38%
Similar OCF growth to SNAP's 33.51%. Walter Schloss would assume comparable operations or industry factors.
70.31%
FCF growth above 1.5x SNAP's 32.20%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
449.94%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 900.49%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
117.24%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 900.49%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
78.12%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 900.49%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
446.07%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 23.58%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
149.20%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 23.58%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
116.81%
3Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 23.58%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is quickly gaining an operational edge over the competitor.
543.62%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
196.77%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
127.76%
Positive short-term CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff would see a clear advantage in near-term profit trajectory.
458.33%
Equity/share CAGR of 458.33% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
96.24%
Equity/share CAGR of 96.24% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
44.05%
Equity/share CAGR of 44.05% 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.
4.77%
AR growth well above SNAP's 6.95%. Michael Burry fears inflated revenue or higher default risk in the near future.
73.64%
Inventory growth of 73.64% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
4.69%
Positive asset growth while SNAP is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
4.65%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
0.13%
Debt growth of 0.13% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees additional leverage that must yield profitable expansions to be worthwhile.
2.31%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. SNAP's 0.13%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
2.33%
We expand SG&A while SNAP cuts. John Neff might see the competitor as more cost-optimized unless we expect big payoffs from the overhead growth.