Staffing & Employment Services
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
BZ vs ZM vs MSFT vs RCUS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Software - Application
Software - Infrastructure
Biotechnology
BZ vs ZM vs MSFT vs RCUS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Staffing & Employment Services | Software - Application | Software - Infrastructure | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $12.38B | $33.30B | $3.13T | $2.50B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $8.01B | $4.87B | $318.27B | $236M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $2.49B | $1.90B | $125.22B | $-369M |
| Gross Margin | 84.5% | 77.0% | 68.3% | 90.7% |
| Operating Margin | 26.9% | 23.1% | 46.8% | -168.6% |
| Forward P/E | 1.7x | 18.4x | 25.3x | — |
| Total Debt | $302M | $31M | $112.18B | $99M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2.55B | $1.27B | $30.24B | $222M |
BZ vs ZM vs MSFT vs RCUS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kanzhun Limited (BZ) | 100 | 35.9 | -64.1% |
| Zoom Communications… (ZM) | 100 | 28.0 | -72.0% |
| Microsoft Corporati… (MSFT) | 100 | 155.4 | +55.4% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 90.3 | -9.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BZ vs ZM vs MSFT vs RCUS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BZ is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 23.6%, EPS growth 43.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 20.0%
- 23.6% revenue growth vs RCUS's -4.3%
ZM is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.95, Low D/E 0.3%, current ratio 4.33x
- PEG 0.82 vs MSFT's 1.35
- Beta 0.95, current ratio 4.33x
- Better valuation composite
MSFT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 19 yrs, beta 0.89, yield 0.8%
- 7.9% 10Y total return vs RCUS's 45.9%
- 39.3% margin vs RCUS's -156.4%
- Beta 0.89 vs RCUS's 1.95
RCUS is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +209.6% vs BZ's -9.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 23.6% revenue growth vs RCUS's -4.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.3% margin vs RCUS's -156.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs RCUS's 1.95 | |
| Dividends | 0.8% yield; 19-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +209.6% vs BZ's -9.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 19.2% ROA vs RCUS's -35.3%, ROIC 24.9% vs -64.1% |
BZ vs ZM vs MSFT vs RCUS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BZ vs ZM vs MSFT vs RCUS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MSFT leads in 3 of 6 categories
ZM leads 2 • BZ leads 0 • RCUS leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MSFT is the larger business by revenue, generating $318.3B annually — 1348.6x RCUS's $236M. MSFT is the more profitable business, keeping 39.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RCUS's -156.4%. On growth, MSFT holds the edge at +18.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $8.0B | $4.9B | $318.3B | $236M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.2B | $1.3B | $192.6B | -$391M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $2.5B | $1.9B | $125.2B | -$369M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $3.3B | $1.9B | $72.9B | -$489M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +84.5% | +77.0% | +68.3% | +90.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +26.9% | +23.1% | +46.8% | -168.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +31.1% | +39.0% | +39.3% | -156.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +41.5% | +39.5% | +22.9% | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +13.2% | +5.3% | +18.3% | -39.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +63.5% | +91.4% | +23.4% | +10.5% |
Valuation Metrics
ZM leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.5x trailing earnings, ZM trades at a 43% valuation discount to MSFT's 30.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), ZM offers better value at 0.78x vs MSFT's 1.64x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12.4B | $33.3B | $3.13T | $2.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $12.0B | $32.1B | $3.21T | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 27.61x | 17.53x | 30.86x | -7.54x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 1.67x | 18.44x | 25.34x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.78x | 1.64x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 44.10x | 25.52x | 19.72x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 11.45x | 6.84x | 11.10x | 10.11x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.92x | 3.40x | 9.15x | 4.22x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 31.36x | 17.31x | 43.66x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MSFT leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MSFT delivers a 33.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-69 for RCUS. ZM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MSFT's 0.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BZ scores 7/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +14.9% | +19.4% | +33.1% | -69.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +11.7% | +15.9% | +19.2% | -35.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.3% | +10.4% | +24.9% | -64.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.2% | +11.8% | +29.7% | -42.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 0 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.00x | 0.33x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2.3B | -$1.2B | $81.9B | -$123M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.6B | $1.3B | $30.2B | $222M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $302M | $31M | $112.2B | $99M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 55.65x | -13.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ZM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MSFT five years ago would be worth $17,246 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,670 for ZM. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +209.6% total return vs BZ's -9.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ZM at 19.9% vs BZ's -7.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -31.9% | +30.1% | -10.8% | +6.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -9.4% | +37.8% | -2.1% | +209.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -20.8% | +72.2% | +39.5% | +24.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.8% | -63.3% | +72.5% | -18.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.8% | +74.8% | +787.7% | +45.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -7.5% | +19.9% | +11.7% | +7.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ZM and MSFT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MSFT is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 1.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ZM currently trades 99.0% from its 52-week high vs BZ's 56.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.22x | 0.95x | 0.89x | 1.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $25.26 | $109.50 | $555.45 | $28.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.85 | $69.15 | $356.28 | $7.06 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +56.4% | +99.0% | +75.8% | +86.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.3 | 71.2 | 54.0 | 60.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.7M | 4.4M | 32.5M | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
MSFT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BZ as "Buy", ZM as "Hold", MSFT as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 96.6% upside for BZ (target: $28) vs -7.2% for ZM (target: $101). MSFT is the only dividend payer here at 0.77% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $28.00 | $100.56 | $551.75 | $30.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 48 | 81 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.8% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 19 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.23 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.0% | +4.9% | +0.6% | 0.0% |
MSFT leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ZM leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). 1 tied.
BZ vs ZM vs MSFT vs RCUS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Kanzhun Limited (BZ) is the stronger pick with 23.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) offers the better valuation at 17. 5x trailing P/E (18. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kanzhun Limited (BZ) a "Buy" — based on 9 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS?
On trailing P/E, Zoom Communications, Inc.
(ZM) is the cheapest at 17. 5x versus Microsoft Corporation at 30. 9x. On forward P/E, Kanzhun Limited is actually cheaper at 1. 7x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Zoom Communications, Inc. wins at 0. 82x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 35x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS?
Over the past 5 years, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) delivered a total return of +72.
5%, compared to -63. 3% for Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MSFT returned +787. 7% versus BZ's -60. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
89β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 95β — meaning RCUS is approximately 120% more volatile than MSFT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 33% for Microsoft Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Kanzhun Limited (BZ) is pulling ahead at 23.
6% versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Zoom Communications, Inc. grew EPS 92. 5% year-over-year, compared to -4. 8% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RCUS leads at 30. 2% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS?
Zoom Communications, Inc.
(ZM) is the more profitable company, earning 39. 0% net margin versus -142. 9% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 39. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MSFT leads at 45. 6% versus -156. 3% for RCUS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RCUS leads at 96. 0%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 82x versus Microsoft Corporation's 1. 35x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Kanzhun Limited (BZ) trades at 1. 7x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for Microsoft Corporation — 23. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BZ: 96. 6% to $28. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS?
In this comparison, MSFT (0.
8% yield) pays a dividend. BZ, ZM, RCUS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BZ or ZM or MSFT or RCUS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
89), 0. 8% yield, +787. 7% 10Y return). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 1. 95 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MSFT: +787. 7%, RCUS: +45. 9%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between BZ and ZM and MSFT and RCUS?
These companies operate in different sectors (BZ (Industrials) and ZM (Technology) and MSFT (Technology) and RCUS (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: BZ is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ZM is a mid-cap deep-value stock; MSFT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder stock. MSFT pays a dividend while BZ, ZM, RCUS do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.