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.
3.75%
Revenue growth below 50% of ZETA's 16.65%. Michael Burry would check for competitive disadvantage risks.
5.34%
Cost growth less than half of ZETA's 29.86%. David Dodd would verify if cost advantage is structural.
3.28%
Gross profit growth below 50% of ZETA's 8.15%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-0.45%
Both companies show margin pressure. Martin Whitman would check industry conditions.
3.06%
R&D growth less than half of ZETA's 14.15%. David Dodd would verify if efficiency advantage is sustainable.
-1.22%
G&A reduction while ZETA shows 15.05% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine efficiency advantage.
10.75%
Marketing expense growth 50-75% of ZETA's 14.63%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine spending effectiveness.
935.00%
Other expenses growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
6.07%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x ZETA's 1.19%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
5.81%
Total costs growth less than half of ZETA's 11.77%. David Dodd would verify sustainability.
-100.00%
Both companies reducing interest expense. Martin Whitman would check industry trends.
4.05%
D&A growth while ZETA reduces D&A. John Neff would investigate differences.
-74.07%
EBITDA decline while ZETA shows 406.86% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
1.80%
EBITDA margin growth below 50% of ZETA's 363.07%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-96.99%
Operating income decline while ZETA shows 68.32% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-97.10%
Operating margin decline while ZETA shows 72.84% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
1618.18%
Other expenses growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-94.36%
Pre-tax income decline while ZETA shows 41.76% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-94.56%
Pre-tax margin decline while ZETA shows 50.07% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-32.19%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-109.63%
Net income decline while ZETA shows 40.68% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-109.28%
Net margin decline while ZETA shows 49.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-109.62%
EPS decline while ZETA shows 41.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-109.78%
Diluted EPS decline while ZETA shows 41.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.15%
Share count reduction while ZETA shows 2.21% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-1.29%
Diluted share reduction while ZETA shows 2.21% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.