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.
0.44%
Net income growth under 50% of ZETA's 187.69%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues in generating bottom-line growth.
5.86%
Less D&A growth vs. ZETA's 33.48%, reducing the hit to reported earnings. David Dodd would confirm that core assets remain sufficient.
13.45%
Some yoy growth while ZETA is negative at -15436.96%. John Neff would see competitor possibly managing deferrals more aggressively for short-term advantage.
-0.26%
Both cut yoy SBC, with ZETA at -8.83%. Martin Whitman would view it as an industry shift to reduce stock-based pay or a sign of reduced expansions.
184.85%
Slight usage while ZETA is negative at -401.37%. John Neff would note competitor possibly capturing more free cash unless expansions are needed here.
-553.16%
AR is negative yoy while ZETA is 65.85%. Joel Greenblatt would see a short-term cash advantage if revenue remains unaffected vs. competitor's approach.
-78.85%
Negative yoy inventory while ZETA is 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see a near-term cash advantage if top-line doesn't suffer.
548.77%
A yoy AP increase while ZETA is negative at -315.48%. John Neff would see competitor possibly improving relationships or liquidity more rapidly.
344.01%
Some yoy usage while ZETA is negative at -41.12%. John Neff would see competitor possibly generating more free cash from minor accounts than we do.
53.75%
Well above ZETA's 83.68%. Michael Burry would worry about large intangible write-downs or revaluation gains overshadowing real performance.
16.54%
Operating cash flow growth at 50-75% of ZETA's 26.98%. Martin Whitman would worry about lagging operational liquidity vs. competitor.
-26.67%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -467.55%. Martin Whitman would suspect a cyclical or broad capital spending slowdown in the niche.
14.79%
Acquisition growth of 14.79% while ZETA is zero at 0.00%. Bruce Berkowitz sees a mild outflow that must deliver synergy to justify the difference.
-29.68%
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.
-32.34%
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.
70.18%
Growth well above ZETA's 100.00%. Michael Burry would suspect heavier intangible or side spending overshadowing competitor’s approach, risking short-term FCF.
-38.77%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -673.72%. Martin Whitman suspects a broader cyclical shift away from heavy investing across the niche.
-54.86%
Both yoy lines negative, with ZETA at -100.00%. Martin Whitman suspects an environment prompting net new borrowings or weaker paydowns across the niche.
2.30%
Issuance growth of 2.30% 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.
0.07%
We have some buyback growth while ZETA is negative at -669.68%. John Neff sees a short-term advantage in boosting EPS unless expansions hamper competitor.