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.
35.66%
Net income growth at 75-90% of ZETA's 40.68%. Bill Ackman would call for strategic or operational tweaks to match competitor’s earnings growth.
-4.48%
Both reduce yoy D&A, with ZETA at -1.61%. Martin Whitman would suspect a lull in expansions or intangible additions for both.
-150.58%
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.
3.40%
Less SBC growth vs. ZETA's 10.68%, indicating lower equity issuance. David Dodd would confirm the firm still retains key staff.
5.93%
Working capital change of 5.93% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz would see a moderate difference that might affect near-term cash flow.
-562.34%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with ZETA at -367.30%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
-1143.75%
Negative yoy inventory while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
300.00%
AP growth well above ZETA's 224.45%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
47.16%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. ZETA's 100.00%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
-7.95%
Both negative yoy, with ZETA at -192.80%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
3.24%
Operating cash flow growth below 50% of ZETA's 20.83%. Michael Burry would see a serious shortfall in day-to-day cash profitability.
-34.69%
Negative yoy CapEx while ZETA is 14.14%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
55.36%
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.
33.90%
Purchases growth of 33.90% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
-40.91%
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.
90.46%
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.
-19.03%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -18.84%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-1496.21%
We cut debt repayment yoy while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
23.46%
Issuance growth of 23.46% 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.
14.40%
We have some buyback growth while ZETA is negative at -23.83%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.