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.
16.87%
Some net income increase while SNAP is negative at -10.23%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
11.25%
D&A growth well above SNAP's 14.73%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
79.11%
Well above SNAP's 107.63% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
17.32%
SBC growth while SNAP is negative at -26.39%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-48.49%
Negative yoy working capital usage while SNAP is 110.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
157.35%
AR growth well above SNAP's 160.99%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-93.21%
Negative yoy inventory while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-98.00%
Both negative yoy AP, with SNAP at -181.30%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-93.35%
Both reduce yoy usage, with SNAP at -167.47%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
60.00%
Some yoy increase while SNAP is negative at -28.39%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
2.48%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -31.75%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-24.31%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -71.20%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-188.24%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
23.71%
Some yoy expansion while SNAP is negative at -5.49%. John Neff sees competitor possibly refraining from new investments or liquidating existing ones for immediate cash.
119.06%
Proceeds from sales/maturities above 1.5x SNAP's 15.37%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm is capitalizing on strong valuations or freeing liquidity for expansions.
-133.33%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -120.69%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
74.22%
Investing outflow well above SNAP's 48.49%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-85.18%
We cut yoy buybacks while SNAP is 97.95%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.