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.
-0.23%
Revenue decline while SNAP shows 8.69% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
6.89%
Cost increase while SNAP reduces costs. John Neff would investigate competitive disadvantage.
-1.85%
Gross profit decline while SNAP shows 16.18% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
-1.63%
Margin decline while SNAP shows 6.89% expansion. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
3.61%
R&D growth less than half of SNAP's 11.16%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
50.61%
G&A growth while SNAP reduces overhead. John Neff would investigate operational differences.
9.05%
Marketing expense growth less than half of SNAP's 21.03%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
180.00%
Similar other expenses growth to SNAP's 166.38%. Walter Schloss would investigate industry patterns.
13.31%
Operating expenses growth 1.25-1.5x SNAP's 10.31%. Martin Whitman would scrutinize control.
11.23%
Total costs growth above 1.5x SNAP's 6.27%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
-0.83%
Both companies reducing interest expense. Martin Whitman would check industry trends.
0.45%
D&A growth less than half of SNAP's 15.00%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency is sustainable.
-13.48%
EBITDA decline while SNAP shows 71.48% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-13.28%
EBITDA margin decline while SNAP shows 73.76% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-15.72%
Operating income decline while SNAP shows 6.07% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-15.52%
Operating margin decline while SNAP shows 13.58% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-2.74%
Other expenses reduction while SNAP shows 181.91% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-15.57%
Pre-tax income decline while SNAP shows 53.78% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-15.37%
Pre-tax margin decline while SNAP shows 57.48% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-35.30%
Tax expense reduction while SNAP shows 152.79% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-11.55%
Net income decline while SNAP shows 52.55% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-11.34%
Net margin decline while SNAP shows 56.35% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-10.90%
EPS decline while SNAP shows 53.57% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-10.80%
Diluted EPS decline while SNAP shows 53.57% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.75%
Share count reduction while SNAP shows 2.18% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-0.70%
Diluted share reduction while SNAP shows 2.18% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.