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.
36.42%
Some net income increase while SNAP is negative at -14.80%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
3.92%
Less D&A growth vs. SNAP's 12.69%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
-83.39%
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.
33.07%
SBC growth well above SNAP's 0.96%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
37.34%
Slight usage while SNAP is negative at -129.10%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-155.93%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with SNAP at -135.94%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
95.38%
AP growth well above SNAP's 122.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
343.40%
Growth well above SNAP's 150.64%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-41.81%
Negative yoy while SNAP is 2.53%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
23.65%
Some CFO growth while SNAP is negative at -154.23%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
9.15%
Lower CapEx growth vs. SNAP's 22.44%, potentially boosting near-term free cash. David Dodd would confirm no missed expansions that competitor might exploit.
81.31%
Acquisition growth of 81.31% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-743.53%
Negative yoy purchasing while SNAP stands at 27.78%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
240.07%
We have some liquidation growth while SNAP is negative at -24.95%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
-103.19%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -205.33%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
22.84%
We have mild expansions while SNAP is negative at -552.19%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
16.67%
Debt repayment growth of 16.67% 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.
90.41%
Buyback growth of 90.41% while SNAP is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a modest per-share advantage that might accumulate if the stock is below intrinsic value.