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.
11.41%
Net income growth at 50-75% of ZETA's 17.39%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging competitiveness unless expansions are planned.
-2.71%
Negative yoy D&A while ZETA is 5.06%. Joel Greenblatt would note a short-term EPS advantage unless competitor invests for future advantage.
-28.35%
Both lines show negative yoy. Martin Whitman would see an industry or cyclical factor reducing tax deferrals for both players.
-2.88%
Negative yoy SBC while ZETA is 0.10%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
117.81%
Slight usage while ZETA is negative at -685.36%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
55.50%
AR growth while ZETA is negative at -37.61%. John Neff would note competitor possibly improving working capital while we allow AR to rise.
-91.88%
Negative yoy inventory while ZETA is 511.42%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
80.22%
A yoy AP increase while ZETA is negative at -83.04%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
155.24%
Some yoy usage while ZETA is negative at -196.95%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
-118.69%
Both negative yoy, with ZETA at -25.39%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall environment of intangible cleanup or shifting revaluations for the niche.
118.75%
Operating cash flow growth above 1.5x ZETA's 10.66%. David Dodd would confirm superior cost control or stronger revenue-to-cash conversion.
-5.31%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -20.30%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
55.67%
Acquisition spending well above ZETA's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier integration risk or short-term free cash flow drain vs. competitor.
21.86%
Purchases growth of 21.86% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
22.99%
Liquidation growth of 22.99% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-460.13%
We reduce yoy other investing while ZETA is 14.18%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term cash advantage unless competitor’s intangible or side bets produce strong returns.
54.35%
Investing outflow well above ZETA's 7.97%. Michael Burry sees possible short-term FCF risk unless these invests pay off quickly vs. competitor’s approach.
100.00%
Debt repayment similar to ZETA's 100.00%. Walter Schloss sees parallel liability management or similar free cash flow availability.
120.58%
Issuance growth of 120.58% 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.
-0.92%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -152.60%. Martin Whitman would see an overall reduced environment for buybacks in the niche or cyclical factor driving capital usage.