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.
25.65%
Similar revenue growth to SNAP's 29.23%. Walter Schloss would investigate if similar growth reflects similar quality.
6.08%
Cost growth less than half of SNAP's 20.01%. David Dodd would verify if cost advantage is structural.
28.85%
Gross profit growth below 50% of SNAP's 2808.49%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
2.55%
Margin expansion below 50% of SNAP's 2150.58%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
1.56%
R&D growth less than half of SNAP's 19.06%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
17.58%
G&A growth less than half of SNAP's 58.20%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is structural.
20.86%
Marketing expense growth less than half of SNAP's 45.39%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
-366.67%
Other expenses reduction while SNAP shows 14.50% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
10.13%
Operating expenses growth less than half of SNAP's 38.57%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
9.10%
Total costs growth less than half of SNAP's 29.42%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
12.00%
Interest expense growth 50-75% of SNAP's 19.75%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine efficiency.
3.89%
D&A growth less than half of SNAP's 42.97%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency is sustainable.
39.72%
EBITDA growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
11.21%
EBITDA margin growth exceeding 1.5x SNAP's 0.09%. David Dodd would verify competitive advantages.
46.52%
Operating income growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
16.61%
Operating margin growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
-172.34%
Both companies reducing other expenses. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
43.27%
Pre-tax income growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
14.03%
Pre-tax margin growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
79.52%
Similar tax expense growth to SNAP's 95.68%. Walter Schloss would investigate patterns.
35.88%
Net income growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
19.37%
Net margin growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
49.40%
EPS growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
47.56%
Diluted EPS growth while SNAP declines. John Neff would investigate advantages.
0.25%
Share count change of 0.25% while SNAP is stable. Bruce Berkowitz would verify approach.
0.24%
Diluted share change of 0.24% while SNAP is stable. Bruce Berkowitz would verify approach.