COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026

META vs Z

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. META scored 79.1, Z scored 51.7 — META leads.
Compare another set
META
Meta Platforms, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
79.1
$549.90 · $1.4T
fundamentals as of
Score gap
27.4
META leads
Z
Zillow Group, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · Quality-Growth
51.7
$35.88 · $8.1B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestMETA20.7x
  • Fastest growthMETA+27.7%
  • Strongest balance sheetZ0.13
  • Highest qualityMETA86 / 100
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD79.1/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY86.4GROWTH92.4VALUE61.8
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD51.7/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY35.4GROWTH78.4VALUE49.8
METAZQuality86.435.4Growth92.478.4Value61.849.8
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)18%38%+16x26x+METAoff-scaleZ

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.

FCFMETA$41.0bZ$258m
RevMETA+27.7%Z+17.7%
D/EMETA0.43Z0.13
P/EMETA20.7xZ156.0x
PEGMETA0.82Z0.93
META
stronger →← stronger
Z
86
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
35
92
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
78
62
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
50
META is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
META
Z
$41.0bA
FCF
$258mC
+27.7%A-
Rev
+17.7%B+
0.43B+
D/E
0.13A-
20.7xB
P/E
156.0xD
0.82B+
PEG
0.93B+
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.
META
Z
130% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
132% above
~30%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~39%/yr
-61%
1-yr DCF upside
-67%
-57%
5-yr DCF upside
-57%
-50%
10-yr DCF upside
-39%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
META
Why this score
  • Durable high returns
Z
Why this score
  • Diluting shareholders
METAMeta Platforms, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $549.90 · beta 1.24
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $1.4T. Down 30% from 52-week high of $790.80 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +28% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.82 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 57 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $754.14 (implying +37% upside).
Moat
Net margin 30% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 26% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. $1.4T market cap places it among the largest companies in the sector — distribution, R&D, and customer-acquisition costs amortize across a base peers can't replicate.
Risk
Down 30% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
ZZillow Group, Inc.
Internet Content & Information · $35.88 · beta 1.98
Why now
Internet Content & Information · market cap $8.1b. Down 62% from 52-week high of $93.88 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +18%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.93 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $46.00 (implying +28% upside).
Moat
Free cash flow runs well ahead of reported net income — non-cash charges (depreciation, intangible amortization) are holding down GAAP earnings while cash generation stays strong.
Risk
Trailing P/E 156.0x prices in sustained high growth — any quarter that disappoints triggers sharp re-rating. Down 62% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Beta 1.98 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
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 META and Z diverge

On the headline score the gap is 27.4 points in favor of META. The widest single difference is Quality, where META leads by 51.0 points.

Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a 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.