Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. VSAT scored 22.0, ZBRA scored 67.2 — ZBRA leads.
Compare another set
VSAT
Viasat, Inc.
Communication Equipment · Quality-Growth
22
$72.01 · $9.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
45.2
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
Fastest growthZBRA+12.7%
Strongest balance sheetZBRA0.86
Highest qualityZBRA77 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
VSAT
stronger →← stronger
ZBRA
27
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
77
26
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
76
15
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
52
ZBRA is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
VSAT
ZBRA
$329mC
FCF
$904mC+
+1.3%C
Rev
+12.7%B+
1.47C
D/E
0.86C+
2.1xA-
P/S
—
0.26A
PEG
0.64A-
—
P/E
35.0xB
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
VSAT
ZBRA
243% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
91% above
~37%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~22%/yr
-70%
1-yr DCF upside
-49%
-71%
5-yr DCF upside
-48%
-72%
10-yr DCF upside
-46%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
VSAT
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
ZBRA
Why this score
Buying back stock
The companies
VSATViasat, Inc.
Communication Equipment · $72.01 · beta 1.76
Why now
Communication Equipment · market cap $9.9b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $93.03 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.26 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 10 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $103.94 (implying +44% upside).
Moat
Turnaround / out-of-favor name — GAAP-unprofitable for now, so the durability case is forward-looking: it rests on a recovery (margin normalization, a cyclical upturn or restructuring) or an un-monetized asset (IP / network effects / first-mover position) rather than on current reported results.
Risk
Currently unprofitable (margin -0.6%) — path to GAAP profitability is the core thesis risk. Beta 1.76 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. ROE -1% is below the long-run sustainable threshold of ~10% — capital efficiency would need to improve for the equity base to compound at the market rate.
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 VSAT and ZBRA diverge
On the headline score the gap is 45.2 points in favor of ZBRA. The widest single difference is Growth, where ZBRA leads by 49.9 points.
GrowthVSAT 26.2 · ZBRA 76.1ZBRA +49.9
QualityVSAT 27.4 · ZBRA 76.9ZBRA +49.5
ValueVSAT 14.9 · ZBRA 51.9ZBRA +37.0
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 VSAT the better stock?
ZBRA scores higher: ZBRA 67.2, VSAT 22.0 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 VSAT differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where ZBRA leads by 50 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ZBRA leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are ZBRA and VSAT 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.