PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
503.87 - 512.55
344.79 - 555.45
23.62M / 20.39M (Avg.)
37.30 | 13.67
Shows the trajectory of a company's cash-generation capacity. Consistent growth in operating and free cash flow suggests a robust, self-funding business model—crucial for value investors seeking undervalued, cash-rich opportunities.
-15.11%
Negative net income growth while ZETA stands at 40.68%. Joel Greenblatt would see a comparative disadvantage in bottom-line performance.
-17.00%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with ZETA at -1.61%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
105.48%
Well above ZETA's 53.19% if it’s a large positive yoy. Michael Burry would see a bigger future tax burden vs. competitor’s approach.
-76.86%
Negative yoy SBC while ZETA is 10.68%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
586.33%
Working capital change of 586.33% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
169.42%
AR growth while ZETA is negative at -367.30%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
127.85%
Growth well above ZETA's 100.00%. Michael Burry would see a potential hidden liquidity or overhead issue overshadowing competitor's approach.
-977.46%
Both negative yoy, with ZETA at -192.80%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
8.66%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of ZETA's 20.83%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-23.84%
Negative yoy CapEx while ZETA is 14.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
12.50%
Purchases growth of 12.50% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-7.50%
We reduce yoy sales while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly capitalizing on market peaks or forced to raise cash while we hold tight.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
62.13%
We have mild expansions while ZETA is negative at -18.84%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
100.00%
Debt repayment growth of 100.00% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
200.53%
Issuance growth of 200.53% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild dilution that must be justified by expansions or acquisitions vs. competitor’s stable share base.
-120.27%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -23.83%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.