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.
74.33%
Some net income increase while SNAP is negative at -1.17%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
11.73%
Some D&A expansion while SNAP is negative at -0.22%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
67.89%
Deferred tax of 67.89% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a partial difference that can matter for future cash flow if large in magnitude.
-1.45%
Both cut yoy SBC, with SNAP at -18.28%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
-77.67%
Negative yoy working capital usage while SNAP is 6.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
-174.40%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SNAP at -95.33%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-0.46%
Negative yoy inventory while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
222.22%
AP growth of 222.22% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might matter for short-term liquidity if expansions are large.
1.08%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. SNAP's 936.34%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
-50.00%
Both negative yoy, with SNAP at -6297.96%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
28.97%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -5.08%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
11.28%
Some CapEx rise while SNAP is negative at -10.57%. John Neff would see competitor possibly building capacity while we hold back expansions.
85.19%
Acquisition growth of 85.19% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-17.43%
Negative yoy purchasing while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
57.99%
Liquidation growth of 57.99% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-24.24%
We reduce yoy other investing while SNAP is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
17.39%
Lower net investing outflow yoy vs. SNAP's 57.93%, preserving short-term cash. David Dodd would confirm expansions remain sufficient.
47.83%
Debt repayment growth of 47.83% 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.