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.
20.57%
Revenue growth under 50% of SNAP's 49.43%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
26.90%
Gross profit growth under 50% of SNAP's 89.28%. Michael Burry would be concerned about a severe competitive disadvantage.
75.67%
EBIT growth above 1.5x SNAP's 43.52%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
75.67%
Operating income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 45.96%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
61.62%
Net income growth above 1.5x SNAP's 38.69%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
62.75%
EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 39.13%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
60.78%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x SNAP's 39.13%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
-0.34%
Share reduction while SNAP is at 1.34%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-0.17%
Reduced diluted shares while SNAP is at 1.34%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
21.51%
OCF growth 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 17.62%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if superior pricing or efficient operations explain the gap.
34.82%
FCF growth above 1.5x SNAP's 15.51%. David Dodd would verify if the firm’s strategic investments yield superior returns.
494.35%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 1937.43%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
149.64%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 1937.43%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
69.65%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of SNAP's 174.43%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
452.55%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 71.76%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
185.80%
5Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x SNAP's 71.76%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has better cost structures or brand premium boosting mid-term cash flow.
75.75%
3Y OCF/share CAGR similar to SNAP's 76.24%. Walter Schloss might see both benefiting from a rising tide or parallel expansions.
386.77%
Positive 10Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might see a substantial advantage in bottom-line trajectory.
185.40%
Positive 5Y CAGR while SNAP is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
70.47%
3Y net income/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 62.08%. Bruce Berkowitz might see new markets, M&A, or better cost discipline driving the difference.
361.29%
Equity/share CAGR of 361.29% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
84.95%
Equity/share CAGR of 84.95% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a minor advantage that could compound if the firm maintains positive net worth growth.
38.30%
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.
18.14%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. SNAP's 39.79%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
2.45%
Inventory growth of 2.45% while SNAP is zero. Bruce Berkowitz wonders if we anticipate a new wave of demand or risk being stuck with extra product.
7.45%
Asset growth above 1.5x SNAP's 2.42%. David Dodd checks if M&A or new capacity expansions are value-accretive vs. competitor's approach.
3.05%
Positive BV/share change while SNAP is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
68.98%
Debt growth far above SNAP's 1.63%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
-0.28%
Our R&D shrinks while SNAP invests at 8.73%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
7.72%
SG&A growth well above SNAP's 6.45%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.