PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
743.76 - 757.57
479.80 - 796.25
8.25M / 11.73M (Avg.)
27.40 | 27.58
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-5.42%
Negative net income growth while SNAP stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
34.72%
D&A growth well above SNAP's 6.12%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-87.13%
Negative yoy deferred tax while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
9.38%
SBC growth well above SNAP's 1.84%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
178.81%
Slight usage while SNAP is negative at -100.00%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
20.00%
AR growth while SNAP is negative at -101.59%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
183.57%
Inventory growth of 183.57% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
190.00%
A yoy AP increase while SNAP is negative at -374.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
205.24%
Growth well above SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
82.33%
Well above SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
337.98%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -41.63%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-3.03%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -73.86%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
66.67%
Acquisition growth of 66.67% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
55.04%
Some yoy expansion while SNAP is negative at -74.24%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
300.00%
Growth of 300.00% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
60.88%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. SNAP's 7722.77%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
13.21%
Debt repayment growth of 13.21% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.