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
Helps investors judge whether earnings growth is driven by sustainable operations or temporary factors. Consistent, organic income expansion can justify a higher intrinsic value for patient, long-term investors.
20.22%
Revenue growth 1.25-1.5x ZETA's 16.65%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine if growth advantage is sustainable.
49.27%
Cost growth above 1.5x ZETA's 29.86%. Michael Burry would check for structural cost disadvantages.
12.15%
Gross profit growth 1.25-1.5x ZETA's 8.15%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine sustainability.
-6.71%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
1.80%
R&D growth less than half of ZETA's 14.15%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
-3.70%
G&A reduction while ZETA shows 15.05% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency advantage.
29.72%
Marketing expense growth above 1.5x ZETA's 14.63%. Michael Burry would check for spending discipline.
1350.00%
Other expenses growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
13.47%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x ZETA's 1.19%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
26.77%
Total costs growth above 1.5x ZETA's 11.77%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
1.06%
Interest expense growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-6.61%
Both companies reducing D&A. Martin Whitman would check industry patterns.
10.90%
EBITDA growth below 50% of ZETA's 406.86%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-8.46%
EBITDA margin decline while ZETA shows 363.07% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
10.98%
Operating income growth below 50% of ZETA's 68.32%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-7.69%
Operating margin decline while ZETA shows 72.84% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
137.86%
Other expenses growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
12.77%
Pre-tax income growth below 50% of ZETA's 41.76%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-6.20%
Pre-tax margin decline while ZETA shows 50.07% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
3.00%
Tax expense growth while ZETA reduces burden. John Neff would investigate differences.
15.44%
Net income growth below 50% of ZETA's 40.68%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-3.98%
Net margin decline while ZETA shows 49.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
16.18%
EPS growth below 50% of ZETA's 41.00%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
14.71%
Diluted EPS growth below 50% of ZETA's 41.00%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
0.12%
Share count reduction exceeding 1.5x ZETA's 2.21%. David Dodd would verify capital allocation.
-0.29%
Diluted share reduction while ZETA shows 2.21% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.