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.
19.74%
Net income growth under 50% of ZETA's 40.68%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
-3.34%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with ZETA at -1.61%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
69.36%
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.
9.54%
SBC growth well above ZETA's 10.68%. Michael Burry would flag major dilution risk vs. competitor’s approach.
-89.91%
Negative yoy working capital usage while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
188.66%
AR growth while ZETA is negative at -367.30%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
16.13%
Inventory growth of 16.13% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate build that must match future sales to avoid risk.
-13233.33%
Negative yoy AP while ZETA is 224.45%. Joel Greenblatt would see quicker payments or less reliance on trade credit than competitor, unless expansions are hindered.
-100.26%
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.
96.19%
Some yoy increase while ZETA is negative at -192.80%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
46.22%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x ZETA's 20.83%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
25.59%
CapEx growth well above ZETA's 14.14%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier cash outlays that risk short-term free cash flow vs. competitor.
-396.73%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -26.79%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
-77.70%
Negative yoy purchasing while ZETA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s new investments produce outsized returns.
30.63%
Liquidation growth of 30.63% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
148.40%
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.
-20.34%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -18.84%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-26.79%
We cut debt repayment yoy while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
112.45%
Issuance growth of 112.45% 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.
-14.59%
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.