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.
3.28%
Revenue growth 50-75% of SNAP's 4.53%. Martin Whitman would scrutinize if slower growth is temporary.
-13.54%
Cost reduction while SNAP shows 6.05% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive advantage.
7.88%
Gross profit growth exceeding 1.5x SNAP's 3.54%. David Dodd would verify competitive advantages.
4.46%
Margin expansion while SNAP shows decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
12.75%
R&D growth 1.1-1.25x SNAP's 10.86%. Bill Ackman would demand evidence of superior returns.
26.57%
G&A growth above 1.5x SNAP's 15.36%. Michael Burry would check for operational inefficiency.
8.54%
Marketing expense growth less than half of SNAP's 28.73%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
-179.92%
Other expenses reduction while SNAP shows 78.19% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
14.15%
Similar operating expenses growth to SNAP's 16.65%. Walter Schloss would investigate norms.
5.57%
Total costs growth less than half of SNAP's 13.31%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
-93.42%
Interest expense reduction while SNAP shows 7.27% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-8.21%
D&A reduction while SNAP shows 108.11% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency.
-3.21%
Both companies show EBITDA decline. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-6.28%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-1.95%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-5.06%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-144.79%
Other expenses reduction while SNAP shows 82.25% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-8.11%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-11.02%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
3.88%
Tax expense growth while SNAP reduces burden. John Neff would investigate differences.
-10.42%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-13.26%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-9.85%
Both companies show declining EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-9.56%
Both companies show declining diluted EPS. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-0.77%
Share count reduction while SNAP shows 0.80% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-1.06%
Diluted share reduction while SNAP shows 0.80% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.