ZETA vs IAS vs DV vs TTD

For growth investors, Zeta Global Holdings Corp.

(ZETA) is the stronger pick with 29. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 11. 7% for Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. (IAS). The Trade Desk, Inc. (TTD) offers the better valuation at 25. 8x trailing P/E (21. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Zeta Global Holdings Corp. (ZETA) a "Buy" — based on 15 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.

On trailing P/E, The Trade Desk, Inc.

(TTD) is the cheapest at 25. 8x versus Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. at 45. 0x. On forward P/E, Zeta Global Holdings Corp. is actually cheaper at 18. 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: DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. wins at 1. 13x versus The Trade Desk, Inc. 's 1. 61x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.

Over the past 5 years, Zeta Global Holdings Corp.

(ZETA) delivered a total return of +94. 4%, compared to -70. 2% for DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. (DV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TTD returned +680. 4% versus DV's -68. 9%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Integral Ad Science Holding Corp.

(IAS) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 83β versus Zeta Global Holdings Corp. 's 2. 79β — meaning ZETA is approximately 235% more volatile than IAS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. (IAS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 6% versus 24% for Zeta Global Holdings Corp. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Zeta Global Holdings Corp.

(ZETA) is pulling ahead at 29. 7% versus 11. 7% for Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. (IAS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. grew EPS 413. 4% year-over-year, compared to -6. 3% for DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ZETA 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.

The Trade Desk, Inc.

(TTD) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 3% net margin versus -2. 4% for Zeta Global Holdings Corp. — meaning it keeps 15. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TTD leads at 20. 3% versus 0. 4% for ZETA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — DV leads at 82. 2%, 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.

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, DoubleVerify Holdings, Inc. (DV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 13x versus The Trade Desk, Inc. 's 1. 61x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Zeta Global Holdings Corp. (ZETA) trades at 18. 7x forward P/E versus 27. 5x for Integral Ad Science Holding Corp. — 8. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for TTD: 58. 0% to $37. 12.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, The Trade Desk, Inc.

(TTD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 06), +680. 4% 10Y return). Zeta Global Holdings Corp. (ZETA) carries a higher beta of 2. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TTD: +680. 4%, ZETA: +94. 4%), 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.

These companies operate in different sectors (ZETA (Technology) and IAS (Communication Services) and DV (Technology) and TTD (Technology)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: ZETA is a small-cap high-growth stock; IAS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; DV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TTD is a mid-cap high-growth stock. 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.