96 Table of Contents were not always contemporaneous with the grant dates of our stock-based awards. In determining whether it was reasonable to rely on the most recent valuation, we considered whether there were any material changes to our business since the date of such valuation, taking into account our actual operating and financial performance, current business conditions, our financial projections, the market performance of comparable publicly traded companies, the U.S. capital market conditions generally, and any other factors we deemed relevant at the time. There were significant judgments and estimates inherent in these valuations, which included assumptions regarding our future operating performance and the determinations of the appropriate valuation methods to be applied. If we had made different estimates or assumptions, our stock-based compensation expense and net income could have been significantly different from those reported in this prospectus. In valuing our shares, we determined our equity value by assessing by a combination of the value indicators using a market comparable approach and an income approach. The valuation method ultimately selected to determine valuation was the market comparable approach after determining that the resulting valuation was reasonable given the range of valuations determined using the income approach. Market comparable approach The market comparable approach considers multiples of financial metrics based on both acquisitions and trading multiples of a selected peer group of companies. From the comparable companies, a representative market multiple is determined which is applied to financial metrics to estimate the value of our company. To determine our peer group of companies, we considered companies relevant in terms of consumer use, monetization model, margin and growth characteristics and brand strength operating in these sectors dating and matching, gaming, social, subscription, eCommerce without