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.
-3.84%
Revenue decline while SNAP shows 1.58% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
10.09%
Cost growth above 1.5x SNAP's 4.57%. Michael Burry would check for structural cost disadvantages.
-6.91%
Both companies show declining gross profit. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-3.18%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
5.52%
R&D growth less than half of SNAP's 11.73%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
13.29%
G&A growth above 1.5x SNAP's 5.34%. Michael Burry would check for operational inefficiency.
5.15%
Marketing expense growth while SNAP reduces spending. John Neff would investigate strategic advantage.
83.25%
Other expenses growth less than half of SNAP's 525.55%. David Dodd would verify if advantage is sustainable.
6.95%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x SNAP's 2.96%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
7.75%
Total costs growth above 1.5x SNAP's 3.43%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
1440.00%
Interest expense growth while SNAP reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
9.90%
D&A growth while SNAP reduces D&A. John Neff would investigate differences.
-24.17%
EBITDA decline while SNAP shows 6.57% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-21.13%
EBITDA margin decline while SNAP shows 8.02% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-32.23%
Both companies show declining income. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
-29.52%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
48.84%
Other expenses growth less than half of SNAP's 701.51%. David Dodd would verify if advantage is sustainable.
-31.88%
Pre-tax income decline while SNAP shows 15.61% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-29.16%
Pre-tax margin decline while SNAP shows 16.93% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-21.21%
Tax expense reduction while SNAP shows 32.03% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
-34.28%
Net income decline while SNAP shows 14.82% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-31.65%
Net margin decline while SNAP shows 16.15% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-33.60%
EPS decline while SNAP shows 15.38% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-33.33%
Diluted EPS decline while SNAP shows 15.38% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.81%
Both companies reducing share counts. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-0.96%
Both companies reducing diluted shares. Martin Whitman would check patterns.