50% Downside For SNAP Stock?
This photograph shows macaron pastries with the Snapchat logo during the inauguration of Snapchat ... More France headquarters in Paris on May 19, 2025. (Photo by JOEL SAGET / AFP) (Photo by JOEL SAGET/AFP via Getty Images)
Snap (NYSE: SNAP) stock has fallen more than 20% this year. In fact, the stock has decreased over 50% from its peak in July of last year. It was trading at around $8 per share at the close of the market yesterday. This recent poor performance can be linked to the absence of second-quarter guidance, worries about how macroeconomic conditions are impacting advertising demand, and slower-than-expected revenue growth, particularly in key segments. The current question is – could it decline further—by another 25-30%? What if it drops to 50%, reaching $4 levels?
Well, here's the issue: even at about $8 per share, the stock isn't inexpensive. It is valued at nearly 35 times its cash flow over the last twelve months. If we invert that figure, it results in a cash flow yield of roughly 2.9% (the ratio of cash flow to price). By comparison, Meta Platforms trades at just 17 times cash flow. Furthermore, Meta is a leader in social networking platforms and has consistently achieved 13% revenue growth over the past few years, in contrast to 9% for SNAP. Is a 35x multiple genuinely warranted for SNAP? What you are willing to pay is significant. We have developed the Trefis High Quality Portfolio with a focus on relative valuation. Notably, HQ has recorded over 91% return since its inception and has outperformed the S&P, Nasdaq, and Dow — all of them. Separately, see – What's Happening With CRM Stock?
Although Snap's average revenue growth of 9% over the past three years is relatively modest, and its -13% net margins are inferior to most companies in the Trefis coverage universe, there's a crucial factor influencing its valuation. Snap has notably increased its user base, with daily active users rising from 319 million in 2021 to 460 million currently. This steady user growth has historically been rewarded by the market.
The company's appeal to advertisers comes from its primary target audience: younger demographics (Gen Z and Millennials). These groups are particularly appealing due to their significant future spending potential and engagement with emerging trends, prompting investors to pay a premium for access to this valuable audience.
While Snap may continue to grow its user base in the short term, the critical challenge lies in enhancing its Average Revenue Per User (ARPU). Failure to achieve this could result in a slowdown in revenue growth. Moreover, the company is currently not profitable, and the necessity to integrate AI into its offerings may further strain its already tight margins.
As a result, Snap's valuation should reflect that of companies experiencing 5-10% revenue growth, assuming it can even maintain that level.
In stark contrast to Snap, Meta is a more stable, resilient, and deeply entrenched entity. Its dominance is 'embedded' in the essential ways people socialize, communicate, and consume digital content. Meta currently trades at about 17 times cash flow while delivering 13% annual growth. If Snap were valued at a comparable 17x cash flow multiple, its share price would drop to around $4, representing another 50% decline.
Could Snap's multiple even fall below the 17x commanded by Meta? Ultimately, the choice of how much you are ready to pay for SNAP is up to you.
Snap's dependence on digital advertising, especially from sectors like consumer goods, entertainment, retail, and tech services, offers a potential silver lining. There's always the chance that advertising expenditures will recover. Historically, when economic conditions improve and consumer confidence rises, marketing budgets are among the first to expand. This occurs because companies typically increase advertising spending when they're optimistic about future sales growth, planning new product launches, or actively competing for market share.
If advertising activities and volumes increase, Snap's revenues are likely to follow. There's considerable pent-up demand from brands that scaled back their advertising efforts during recent economic uncertainty. Importantly, Snap may not need to significantly elevate its ad prices; it mainly requires a boost in advertiser activity to drive its revenue growth.
Comparing SNAP with Meta is essential for understanding the risk-reward profile of investing in Snap. Effective investment decisions rely on gauging relative attractiveness. The central question is: should you invest in SNAP stock, maintain interest-earning cash to avoid market risk, or perhaps choose an S&P 500 ETF? How much higher is the expected return on SNAP stock compared to cash, and what downside risk must be accepted for that potential gain?
Utilizing a specific 'anchor' asset like Meta Platforms provides a strong framework for assessing this risk-reward dynamic.
Note: Choose comparisons wisely. SNAP is currently a 'high valuation' stock. When a company trades at around 35x Price-to-Free Cash Flow (P/FCF), anchoring it against Meta offers essential perspective. Meta, with more reasonable multiples, often makes a more compelling investment case than Snap.
Regardless of the trade-off, investing in a single stock can be risky. Conversely, the Trefis High Quality (HQ) Portfolio, comprising 30 stocks, has a proven track record of comfortably outperforming the S&P 500over the last 4 years. What accounts for this? As a collective, HQ Portfolio stocks have delivered superior returns with reduced risk compared to the standard index, with a more stable performance observable in HQ Portfolio performance metrics.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
23 minutes ago
- CBS News
Pennsylvania food banks worry about SNAP cuts in federal government's proposed budget bill
Food banks fear that if the budget bill heading to the U.S. Senate gets passed, thousands of people in Pennsylvania will go hungry. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program helps nearly 2 million Pennsylvanians put food on the table. "For every meal the food bank provides, SNAP provides nine meals," said Jennifer Miller, CEO of the Westmoreland Food Bank. Leaders from the Westmoreland Food Bank and Feed Pennsylvania came together with the secretaries of the Pennsylvania Departments of Human Services and Agriculture to discuss how proposed federal changes would impact the most vulnerable in the state. They said the House-passed reconciliation bill would cut nearly $300 billion from the SNAP program through 2034. "We have existing work requirements in SNAP, but this bill would make them more strict. And as a result, we believe at least 140,000 Pennsylvanians could lose access to food assistance that helps people be healthy enough to go to work in the first place," Pennsylvania Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Val Arkoosh said. Food banks fear they will see substantially more people lining up for food. "We are not equipped to absorb the massive demand that would result from reduced access to federal nutrition programs. Food banks cannot replace the scale, the reach and the stability of the SNAP program," Miller said. "If enacted, these cuts would eliminate more meals per year distributed by the entire charitable food network in this country," said Julie Bancroft, CEO of Feeding Pennsylvania. State Agriculture Secretary Russell Redding said losing SNAP dollars would also hit farm families. "Roughly 25 cents of every grocery dollar spent goes straight back to the farm, 25 cents for every dollar for food purchased at the grocery store," Redding said. Arkoosh said the proposed cuts would cost the state over $1 billion more annually. "The result would be devastating for Pennsylvania families and for our economy," Arkoosh said. Many believe the fight is not over, though. "You all have a role in contacting your senators, your congressperson, letting them know how this impacts our commnity, our neighbors, our friends," Westmoreland County Commissioner Ted Kopas said.
Bloomberg
39 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Adapt or else? How the sell-side is adjusting to new risks
Among examples, Allright says, are market risk and credit risk capital requirements under the Basel framework. The proposal by the Basel Committee to strengthen banks' resilience to risks was written in 2019, but its introduction has been pushed back repeatedly since then. Banks are unsure when, or even if, they should invest in complying with the rule. There is also a trade-off to be considered – which other compliance project must be deprioritized to provide financial headroom for any new rules? 'Uncertainty of when, or if, a regulation is required adds a risk to a bank, who have to make a decision on how to invest engineering resources to meet regulations,' says Allright. Technology risks Technology itself is adding risks to banking operations. As Bloomberg's Global Head of Sell-Side Product Phil McCabe explained earlier in this report, the advent of electronic trading and automation has compressed investors' fees, hastening the diversification of their portfolios into new markets as they search of better returns. This has brought liquidity to once niche asset classes such as crypto, private equity and structured products Moving into new markets requires investment to develop new complex pricing models and deploy techniques to clean and smooth data. These costs can increase further when there is a requirement to provide portfolio level analytics in a timely manner. Search for innovative solutions Focusing on data and its increasing significance in banking operations: consistent datasets, particularly when used for pricing financial securities, provide banks with reliable informational bases for assessing and addressing emerging risks. Additionally, APIs facilitate connectivity to software and modeling tools, enabling banks to effectively utilise the expanding data pools accumulated by the sell-side on a daily basis. However, as the sophistication of data uses grows, many banks are unlikely to have necessary capabilities in-house to smooth curves and clean data sources as well as accumulate all data sets in a timely fashion, and so they increasingly need to turn to data- and technology-specialist vendors. Mitigation technology Sell-side organizations must consider how to achieve technological transformation to address new risk profiles. Building capacity is one option, but it is costly and requires ongoing updates. This strategy may be impractical if the organization's tech stack is fragmented, and systems are poorly connected. As the speed of technological change and the cost of implementation rise, it has become prudent for banks to outsource these operations. A key to meeting the challenges of the new regulatory landscape is access to consistent data sets and pricing models, says Allright. 'What you [as a bank] don't want to have is a risk solution at the top of the house that's different from a solution that the traders are utilizing, because it's likely they will be looking at different numbers,' he says. In organisations with siloed tech stacks, end users such as traders and compliance professionals, may not be working from single source of truth dataset, or a golden source of their enterprise intelligence. This becomes challenging when different departments may have to report to different regulators with different data sets. Having access to consistent data and pricing models ensures banks can satisfy modern reporting rules because regulators require data transparency and accurate pricing models that can justify the claims and assumptions built into disclosures. An additional reason to seek external support is the ability to connect to data and models in structures such as clouds and APIs, which allows for secure integration of external and internal data and provides organizations with a comprehensive view of their risk exposures. It is of great importance to banks to bring huge volumes of quality data into their systems ready for analysis and querying, says Allright. To that end, Bloomberg has developed tools and technology that allows -banks to access software and infrastructure through the cloud and APIs without the need to for large capital outlays. For instance, Bloomberg's Web Services technology delivers lightweight, industry-standard APIs. These APIs provide banks with flexible access to Bloomberg's software and infrastructure without requiring significant capital investment. 'A lot of investment in the past has gone into hardware on site, but these are machines that are not as flexible and scalable as we move into a new cloud-based computing world,' Allright says. 'We see clients trying to access our set of APIs rather than buy in a fixed product that sits on their desktop because they want to utilize the data and manage the data in different ways increasing deploying their own artificial intelligence – they want to commingle it with their data and create their own IP.'
CNET
41 minutes ago
- CNET
Death to Gmail? Google DeepMind CEO Wants AI to Solve This One Annoying Problem
Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis might have won a Nobel Prize for his work on AlphaFold 2, an AI model that can predict protein structures, but the solution to the problem he really wants to solve still evades him. The problem in question is infinitely easier to grasp and more relatable than Hassabis' work in the field of chemistry. "The thing I really want that we're working on is next-generation email," he said, speaking at SXSW London on Monday. "I would love to get rid of my email." Based on the crowd reaction, it was a popular sentiment in the room, where earlier that day, the former British Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted to sending only one email for the entire 10-year period he was in office. There is some irony to Hassabis' quest. The prize-winning scientist is responsible for developing some of the most complex and sophisticated AI models the world has ever seen, all in aid of working toward cures for diseases that are beyond anything we have access to today. His mission to render email (presumably Gmail?) – an annoyance of our own human invention – obsolete feels like small fry in comparison. But it also exposes the duality of Hassabis' responsibilities at Google. He is, and always has been, deeply committed to pursuing AI for the benefit of humankind. "My personal passion is applying [AI] to the frontiers of science and medicine," he said. At the same time he is beholden to the corporate interests of Google, which acquired DeepMind in 2014. Hassabis always imagined the development of AI to be more of a "scientific-led endeavor," spearheaded by a computer science equivalent to CERN, the famed particle physics lab in Switzerland. But the technology went a different way, becoming commercially viable much quicker than he anticipated. From there, he said, "the capitalist engine has done what it does best." Hassabis almost speaks as though he is separate from the "capitalist engine," but of course he is deeply embedded within it. DeepMind being owned by Google means that as well as pursuing his passion project of curing disease with AI – arguably the most noble use of AI – he must split his attention to ensure Google's AI products, from Gemini to Veo and everything else the company announced at I/O last month are up to scratch in a competitive market. In pursuit of AGI The competition is "ferocious" and it's a hefty work schedule for one man, who says he sleeps very little and doesn't expect to until "we get to AGI," or artificial general intelligence. Along with developing DeepMind's core AI models, and translating them into science, he continues to pursue the development of AGI, or AI that fully matches (or exceeds) human intellectual capabilities. "My feeling is that we're about five to 10 years away," he said. His vision for AGI is that it will unlock a world in which "we can cure many, many diseases – or maybe even all diseases," and "unlimited renewable energy." In some ways, the Google products are stopping off points on the way. One of the reasons DeepMind has built Veo 3, its latest video generation software, said Hassabis, is that AGI needs to have a physical understanding of the world around it. The world models built for Veo 3 are key to this understanding. In turn, these world models will be essential for a breakthrough in robotics, which Hassabis believes is due in the "next few years." While it's sometimes not clear where DeepMind's worthy mission ends and Google's commercial priorities kick in, it's clear that Hassabis is finding ways to make it work for him, and his long-term pursuit of an AGI breakthrough. In spite of the seismic shift he predicts this will cause, even he is skeptical of the hype around AI in the short term. "I mean, it couldn't be any more hyped," he said. "Therefore, it is a little bit overhyped."
