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.
11.01%
Some net income increase while ZETA is negative at -12.15%. John Neff would see a short-term edge over the struggling competitor.
1.21%
D&A growth well above ZETA's 1.82%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier depreciation burdens that might erode net income unless top-line follows suit.
69.92%
Some yoy growth while ZETA is negative at -118.69%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
3.77%
SBC growth while ZETA is negative at -16.63%. John Neff would see competitor possibly controlling share issuance more tightly.
-43.01%
Negative yoy working capital usage while ZETA is 83.66%. Joel Greenblatt would see more free cash if revenue remains unaffected, giving a short-term advantage.
198.13%
AR growth well above ZETA's 131.30%. Michael Burry would fear inflated sales or less stringent credit controls vs. competitor.
-235.03%
Negative yoy inventory while ZETA is 100.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
-7.40%
Both negative yoy AP, with ZETA at -394.05%. Martin Whitman would find an overall trend toward paying down supplier credit in the niche.
-167.56%
Both reduce yoy usage, with ZETA at -108.11%. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical factor pulling back on these items.
-68.18%
Negative yoy while ZETA is 5959.87%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term net income or CFO stability advantage unless competitor invests or writes down more aggressively.
6.30%
Some CFO growth while ZETA is negative at -8.52%. John Neff would note a short-term liquidity lead over the competitor.
-10.89%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -8.17%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
-247.80%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -100.00%. Martin Whitman sees an overall caution or integration phase for both companies’ expansions.
29.36%
Purchases growth of 29.36% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in portfolio building that might matter for returns.
69.81%
Liquidation growth of 69.81% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild difference in monetizing portfolio items that must be justified by market valuations.
-265.06%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -15.91%. Martin Whitman suspects a cyclical or strategic rationale for cutting extra invests in the niche.
105.51%
We have mild expansions while ZETA is negative at -8.18%. John Neff sees competitor possibly divesting or pausing expansions more aggressively.
-50.00%
We cut debt repayment yoy while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees competitor possibly lowering risk more if expansions do not hamper them.
33.79%
Issuance growth of 33.79% 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.
15.31%
We have some buyback growth while ZETA is negative at -76.07%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.