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.
1.77%
Net income growth under 50% of ZETA's 40.68%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-3.78%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with ZETA at -1.61%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
147.37%
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.
141.56%
SBC growth well above ZETA's 10.68%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
86.10%
Working capital change of 86.10% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
291.86%
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.
-16.29%
Negative yoy usage while ZETA is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term advantage in freeing up capital unless competitor invests effectively in these lines.
-214.27%
Both negative yoy, with ZETA at -192.80%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
-17.50%
Negative yoy CFO while ZETA is 20.83%. Joel Greenblatt would see a disadvantage in operational cash generation vs. competitor.
36.12%
CapEx growth well above ZETA's 14.14%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
81.93%
Some acquisitions while ZETA is negative at -26.79%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pausing M&A or divesting while the firm invests in new deals.
17.70%
Purchases growth of 17.70% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-3.62%
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.
-1218.12%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -39.54%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
218.29%
We have mild expansions while ZETA is negative at -18.84%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
107.02%
Issuance growth of 107.02% 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.
-50.79%
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.