Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ZBRA scored 67.2, BDC scored 67.5 — BDC leads.
Compare another set
ZBRA
Zebra Technologies Corporation
Communication Equipment · Quality-Growth
67.2
$387.18 · $18.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
0.3
BDC leads
BDC
Belden Inc.
Communication Equipment · Quality-Growth
67.5
$109.15 · $4.3B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestBDC17.7x
Fastest growthZBRA+12.7%
Strongest balance sheetZBRA0.86
Highest qualityZBRA77 / 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)
ZBRA
stronger →← stronger
BDC
77
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
65
76
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
75
52
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
63
ZBRA is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ZBRA
BDC
$904mC+
FCF
$212mC
+12.7%B+
Rev
+10.3%B
0.86C+
D/E
0.97C
35.5xB
P/E
17.7xA-
0.64A-
PEG
1.05B+
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
ZBRA
BDC
91% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
29% above
~22%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~14%/yr
-49%
1-yr DCF upside
-29%
-48%
5-yr DCF upside
-23%
-46%
10-yr DCF upside
-13%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ZBRA
Why this score
Buying back stock
BDC
No notable signals flagged.
The companies
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.
BDCBelden Inc.
Communication Equipment · $109.15 · beta 1.13
Why now
Communication Equipment · market cap $4.3b. Down 32% from 52-week high of $159.99 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +10%, comfortably above the S&P median. 5 sell-side analysts publish a mean 1-yr target of $153.20 (implying +40% upside).
Moat
ROE 19% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Down 32% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
ZBRA leads BDC by 3.2 points (69.9 to 66.7), its sharpest advantage coming in FCF (grade C+). A contrarian could still prefer BDC for its stronger P/E (grade A-).
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
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 ZBRA and BDC diverge
The two are effectively level on the headline score. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
QualityZBRA 76.9 · BDC 64.7ZBRA +12.2
ValueZBRA 51.9 · BDC 63.2BDC +11.3
GrowthZBRA 76.1 · BDC 75.3level
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 BDC or ZBRA the better stock?
BDC scores higher: BDC 67.5, ZBRA 67.2 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 BDC and ZBRA differ most?
The widest gap is quality, where ZBRA leads by 12 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are BDC and ZBRA 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.