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.
20.23%
Positive growth while SNAP shows revenue decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
15.58%
Cost growth above 1.5x SNAP's 8.17%. Michael Burry would check for structural cost disadvantages.
21.23%
Positive growth while SNAP shows decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
0.83%
Margin expansion while SNAP shows decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
82.73%
R&D growth while SNAP reduces spending. John Neff would investigate strategic advantage.
27.41%
G&A growth above 1.5x SNAP's 6.26%. Michael Burry would check for operational inefficiency.
66.84%
Marketing expense growth while SNAP reduces spending. John Neff would investigate strategic advantage.
204.62%
Other expenses change of 204.62% while SNAP maintains costs. Bruce Berkowitz would investigate efficiency.
66.40%
Operating expenses growth while SNAP reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
50.50%
Total costs growth above 1.5x SNAP's 3.05%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
-100.00%
Interest expense reduction while SNAP shows 17.98% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
49.83%
D&A growth above 1.5x SNAP's 6.12%. Michael Burry would check for excessive investment.
-9.13%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-24.42%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-21.33%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-34.57%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
124.59%
Other expenses growth while SNAP reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-16.62%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-30.65%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-22.08%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-13.22%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-27.66%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-19.35%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-16.67%
Both companies show declining diluted EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
6.27%
Share count increase while SNAP reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.
6.51%
Diluted share increase while SNAP reduces shares. John Neff would investigate differences.