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
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
-3.21%
Both companies show declining revenue. Martin Whitman would check for industry-wide issues.
-5.91%
Cost reduction while SNAP shows 8.17% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive advantage.
-2.58%
Both companies show declining gross profit. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
0.65%
Margin expansion while SNAP shows decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
11.52%
R&D growth while SNAP reduces spending. John Neff would investigate strategic advantage.
-28.35%
G&A reduction while SNAP shows 6.26% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency advantage.
10.62%
Marketing expense growth while SNAP reduces spending. John Neff would investigate strategic advantage.
-100.00%
Other expenses reduction while SNAP shows 0.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
0.42%
Operating expenses growth while SNAP reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-1.72%
Total costs reduction while SNAP shows 3.05% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-100.00%
Interest expense reduction while SNAP shows 17.98% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-3.65%
D&A reduction while SNAP shows 6.12% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
-5.37%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-2.19%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-5.78%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-2.62%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
100.00%
Other expenses growth while SNAP reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-4.87%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-1.67%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-28.67%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
22.88%
Net income growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
26.83%
Net margin growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
19.05%
EPS growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
25.00%
Diluted EPS growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
2.10%
Share count increase while SNAP reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.
1.99%
Diluted share increase while SNAP reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.