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.
-10.12%
Revenue decline while ZETA shows 16.65% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position erosion.
-18.59%
Cost reduction while ZETA shows 29.86% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive advantage.
-4.85%
Gross profit decline while ZETA shows 8.15% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive position.
5.86%
Margin expansion while ZETA shows decline. John Neff would investigate competitive advantages.
9.57%
R&D growth 50-75% of ZETA's 14.15%. Bruce Berkowitz would examine spending effectiveness.
36.75%
G&A growth above 1.5x ZETA's 15.05%. Michael Burry would check for operational inefficiency.
-5.07%
Marketing expense reduction while ZETA shows 14.63% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine competitive risk.
76.74%
Other expenses growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
5.10%
Operating expenses growth above 1.5x ZETA's 1.19%. Michael Burry would check for inefficiency.
-7.99%
Total costs reduction while ZETA shows 11.77% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine advantage.
16.89%
Interest expense growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
13.25%
D&A growth while ZETA reduces D&A. John Neff would investigate differences.
-8.89%
EBITDA decline while ZETA shows 406.86% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
2.69%
EBITDA margin growth below 50% of ZETA's 363.07%. Michael Burry would check for structural issues.
-14.95%
Operating income decline while ZETA shows 68.32% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-5.38%
Operating margin decline while ZETA shows 72.84% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
217.09%
Other expenses growth while ZETA reduces costs. John Neff would investigate differences.
-11.57%
Pre-tax income decline while ZETA shows 41.76% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-1.61%
Pre-tax margin decline while ZETA shows 50.07% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-8.38%
Both companies reducing tax expense. Martin Whitman would check patterns.
-12.46%
Net income decline while ZETA shows 40.68% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-2.60%
Net margin decline while ZETA shows 49.14% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-12.35%
EPS decline while ZETA shows 41.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-12.50%
Diluted EPS decline while ZETA shows 41.00% growth. Joel Greenblatt would examine position.
-0.39%
Share count reduction while ZETA shows 2.21% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.
-0.22%
Diluted share reduction while ZETA shows 2.21% change. Joel Greenblatt would examine strategy.