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.
17.37%
Net income growth under 50% of ZETA's 40.68%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-5.14%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with ZETA at -1.61%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
-115.33%
Negative yoy deferred tax while ZETA stands at 53.19%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
6.49%
SBC growth well above ZETA's 10.68%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
143.11%
Working capital change of 143.11% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
250.99%
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.
-107.01%
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.
-81.69%
Both negative yoy, with ZETA at -192.80%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
59.00%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x ZETA's 20.83%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
49.83%
CapEx growth well above ZETA's 14.14%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
4.88%
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.
26.36%
Purchases growth of 26.36% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
18.71%
Liquidation growth of 18.71% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
100.00%
We have some outflow growth while ZETA is negative at -39.54%. John Neff sees competitor possibly pulling back more aggressively from minor expansions or intangible invests.
84.74%
We have mild expansions while ZETA is negative at -18.84%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
78.06%
Debt repayment growth of 78.06% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild advantage that can reduce interest costs unless expansions demand capital here.
73.43%
Issuance growth of 73.43% 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.
-6900.00%
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.