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.
16.51%
Net income growth under 50% of SNAP's 38.36%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
10.72%
D&A growth well above SNAP's 2.43%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
20.34%
Deferred tax of 20.34% 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.
-7.93%
Negative yoy SBC while SNAP is 0.35%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
379.35%
Well above SNAP's 58.56% if positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a risk of bigger working capital demands vs. competitor, harming free cash flow.
112.22%
AR growth while SNAP is negative at -40.70%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
166.80%
AP growth well above SNAP's 72.96%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
603.91%
Growth well above SNAP's 154.74%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-100.02%
Both negative yoy, with SNAP at -64.71%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
27.64%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of SNAP's 642.04%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-1.04%
Negative yoy CapEx while SNAP is 15.41%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-131.58%
Negative yoy acquisition while SNAP stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-35.85%
Negative yoy purchasing while SNAP stands at 9.24%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
27.25%
We have some liquidation growth while SNAP is negative at -14.38%. John Neff notes a short-term liquidity advantage if competitor is holding or restricted.
1133.33%
Growth well above SNAP's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-3.88%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -3.97%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-215.72%
Both yoy lines negative, with SNAP at -16.86%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting net new borrowings or weaker paydowns across the niche.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-39.99%
We cut yoy buybacks while SNAP is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.