Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CSCO scored 57.1, ZBRA scored 67.2 — ZBRA leads.
Compare another set
CSCO
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Communication Equipment · Quality-Growth
57.1
$118.39 · $466.8B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
10.1
ZBRA leads
ZBRA
Zebra Technologies Corporation
Communication Equipment · Quality-Growth
67.2
$387.18 · $18.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestCSCO34.5x
Fastest growthZBRA+12.7%
Strongest balance sheetCSCO0.62
Highest qualityCSCO77 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CSCO
stronger →← stronger
ZBRA
77
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
77
74
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
76
32
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
ZBRA is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CSCO
ZBRA
$12.8bA-
FCF
$904mC+
+11.8%B
Rev
+12.7%B+
0.62C+
D/E
0.86C+
34.5xB
P/E
35.0xB
1.06B+
PEG
0.64A-
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
CSCO
ZBRA
115% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
91% above
~26%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~22%/yr
-57%
1-yr DCF upside
-49%
-53%
5-yr DCF upside
-48%
-49%
10-yr DCF upside
-46%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CSCO
Why this score
Durable high returns
ZBRA
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
CSCOCisco Systems, Inc.
Communication Equipment · $118.39 · beta 0.98
Why now
Communication Equipment · market cap $466.8b. 9% off the 52-week high of $130.37. Revenue growing +12%, comfortably above the S&P median. 25 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $136.16 (implying +15% upside).
Moat
Net margin 21% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 27% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 96% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trailing P/E 35x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
ZBRAZebra Technologies Corporation
Communication Equipment · $387.18 · beta 1.58
Why now
Communication Equipment · market cap $18.3b. Trading near 52-week high of $390.80 — momentum setup, limited technical margin of safety. Revenue growing +13%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.64 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $413.85 (implying +7% upside).
Moat
ROE 16% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 168% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trading within 1% of the 52-week high — limited technical margin of safety; a momentum reversal would test conviction. Beta 1.58 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. Trailing P/E 35x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where CSCO and ZBRA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 10.1 points in favor of ZBRA. The widest single difference is Value, where ZBRA leads by 19.4 points.
ValueCSCO 32.5 · ZBRA 51.9ZBRA +19.4
GrowthCSCO 74.1 · ZBRA 76.1level
QualityCSCO 77.2 · ZBRA 76.9level
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is ZBRA or CSCO the better stock?
ZBRA scores higher: ZBRA 67.2, CSCO 57.1 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do ZBRA and CSCO differ most?
The widest gap is value, where ZBRA leads by 19 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. The other two pillars are close enough to call level, so this is the one place they genuinely separate.
How are ZBRA and CSCO scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.