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.
-34.28%
Negative net income growth while SNAP stands at 14.82%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
9.90%
Some D&A expansion while SNAP is negative at -54.23%. John Neff would see competitor’s short-term profit advantage unless expansions here deliver big returns.
-142.16%
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.
-6.48%
Negative yoy SBC while SNAP is 7.57%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
27.70%
Less working capital growth vs. SNAP's 183.64%, indicating potentially more efficient day-to-day cash usage. David Dodd would confirm no negative impact on revenue.
79.89%
AR growth well above SNAP's 121.49%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-109.28%
Negative yoy AP while SNAP is 339.37%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-129.17%
Negative yoy usage while SNAP is 320.73%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
173.54%
Some yoy increase while SNAP is negative at -462.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
-20.55%
Negative yoy CFO while SNAP is 145.09%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
-23.81%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -61.90%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
90.63%
Some acquisitions while SNAP is negative at -75.13%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pausing M&A or divesting while the firm invests in new deals.
-16.98%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -44.16%. Martin Whitman would suspect an environment with fewer attractive securities or a strategic pivot to internal growth.
-28.17%
We reduce yoy sales while SNAP is 55.26%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
614.29%
Growth of 614.29% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a moderate difference requiring justification by ROI in these smaller invests.
-39.40%
We reduce yoy invests while SNAP stands at 468.80%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
25.57%
Debt repayment well below SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry suspects heavier leverage risk or insufficient cash generation to keep pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-21.42%
We cut yoy buybacks while SNAP is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.