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.
9.74%
Net income growth at 50-75% of ZETA's 18.11%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging competitiveness unless expansions are planned.
9.16%
D&A growth well above ZETA's 1.98%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
-12.72%
Negative yoy deferred tax while ZETA stands at 267.19%. Joel Greenblatt would consider near-term tax obligations but a possible advantage if competitor's deferrals become a burden later.
-1.99%
Negative yoy SBC while ZETA is 9.47%. Joel Greenblatt would see less immediate dilution advantage if talent levels remain strong.
130.22%
Slight usage while ZETA is negative at -109.47%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-698.58%
Both yoy AR lines negative, with ZETA at -69.66%. Martin Whitman would suspect an overall sector lean approach or softer demand.
252.83%
Some inventory rise while ZETA is negative at -175.69%. John Neff would see competitor possibly benefiting from leaner stock if demand remains.
422.11%
AP growth well above ZETA's 44.42%. Michael Burry would be concerned about potential late payments or short-term liquidity strain relative to competitor.
288.57%
Lower 'other working capital' growth vs. ZETA's 1546.17%. David Dodd would see fewer unexpected short-term demands on cash.
210.00%
Some yoy increase while ZETA is negative at -48.86%. John Neff would see competitor possibly reining in intangible charges or revaluations more effectively than we do.
17.71%
Operating cash flow growth similar to ZETA's 18.11%. Walter Schloss would see parallel improvements or market conditions in cash generation.
-35.36%
Negative yoy CapEx while ZETA is 6.76%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term FCF boost unless competitor invests for long-term advantage.
-13.29%
Negative yoy acquisition while ZETA stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees potential short-term cash advantage unless competitor’s deals yield big synergy.
-32.14%
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.
-13.88%
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.
84.05%
Growth well above ZETA's 8.58%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-179.84%
We reduce yoy invests while ZETA stands at 6.77%. Joel Greenblatt sees near-term liquidity advantage unless competitor’s expansions yield high returns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-4.48%
Negative yoy issuance while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a near-term advantage in avoiding dilution unless competitor invests more effectively with the new shares.
-3.54%
We cut yoy buybacks while ZETA is 44.89%. Joel Greenblatt would question if competitor is gaining a per-share edge unless expansions justify holding cash here.