Specialty Business Services
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
ZGM vs BABA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Specialty Retail
ZGM vs BABA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Specialty Business Services | Specialty Retail |
| Market Cap | $15M | $341.64B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $2M | $1.01T |
| Net Income (TTM) | $799K | $123.35B |
| Gross Margin | 77.0% | 41.2% |
| Operating Margin | 48.2% | 10.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 4.1x |
| Total Debt | $7K | $248.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $327K | $181.73B |
Quick Verdict: ZGM vs BABA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ZGM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 1.11
- Rev growth 135.2%, EPS growth -100.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.11, Low D/E 0.4%, current ratio 0.99x
BABA is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 84.5% 10Y total return vs ZGM's -27.4%
- 1.3% yield; 2-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend
- +12.4% vs ZGM's -27.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 135.2% revenue growth vs BABA's 5.9% | |
| Quality / Margins | 39.4% margin vs BABA's 12.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.11 vs BABA's 1.21, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.3% yield; 2-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +12.4% vs ZGM's -27.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 35.7% ROA vs BABA's 6.7%, ROIC 99.7% vs 9.6% |
ZGM vs BABA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ZGM vs BABA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ZGM leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BABA is the larger business by revenue, generating $1.01T annually — 498823.7x ZGM's $2M. ZGM is the more profitable business, keeping 39.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BABA's 12.2%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $2M | $1.01T |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | — | $114.6B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | — | $123.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | — | $2.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +77.0% | +41.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +48.2% | +10.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +39.4% | +12.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -16.8% | +0.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +4.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -52.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — ZGM and BABA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, ZGM's 12.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than BABA's 13.6x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $15M | $341.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $14M | $351.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | — | 17.99x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 4.14x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.67x | 13.62x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 7.19x | 2.34x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 2.13x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 29.80x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ZGM leads this category, winning 7 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ZGM delivers a 71.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $72 in annual profit, vs $11 for BABA. ZGM carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BABA's 0.23x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BABA scores 7/9 vs ZGM's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +71.7% | +11.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +35.7% | +6.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +99.7% | +9.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +87.6% | +10.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$320,221 | $66.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $327,111 | $181.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6,890 | $248.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 15.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
BABA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ZGM five years ago would be worth $7,263 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,453 for BABA. Over the past 12 months, BABA leads with a +12.4% total return vs ZGM's -27.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BABA at 20.6% vs ZGM's -10.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +32.0% | -9.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -27.4% | +12.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -27.4% | +75.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -27.4% | -35.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -27.4% | +84.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -10.1% | +20.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ZGM and BABA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ZGM is the less volatile stock with a 1.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BABA's 1.21 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BABA currently trades 73.4% from its 52-week high vs ZGM's 59.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.11x | 1.21x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.51 | $192.67 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.18 | $103.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +59.4% | +73.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.7 | 49.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 8K | 10.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
BABA is the only dividend payer here at 1.26% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $194.23 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 59 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $12.14 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +3.8% |
ZGM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BABA leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
ZGM vs BABA: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ZGM or BABA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Zenta Group Company Limited Ordinary Shares (ZGM) is the stronger pick with 135.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 9% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA). Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) offers the better valuation at 18. 0x trailing P/E (4. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) a "Buy" — based on 59 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 is the better long-term investment — ZGM or BABA?
Over the past 5 years, Zenta Group Company Limited Ordinary Shares (ZGM) delivered a total return of -27.
4%, compared to -35. 5% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: BABA returned +84. 5% versus ZGM's -27. 4%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — ZGM or BABA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Zenta Group Company Limited Ordinary Shares (ZGM) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
11β versus Alibaba Group Holding Limited's 1. 21β — meaning BABA is approximately 9% more volatile than ZGM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Zenta Group Company Limited Ordinary Shares (ZGM) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 23% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — ZGM or BABA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Zenta Group Company Limited Ordinary Shares (ZGM) is pulling ahead at 135.
2% versus 5. 9% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Alibaba Group Holding Limited grew EPS 70. 9% year-over-year, compared to -100. 0% for Zenta Group Company Limited Ordinary Shares. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — ZGM or BABA?
Zenta Group Company Limited Ordinary Shares (ZGM) is the more profitable company, earning 39.
4% net margin versus 13. 1% for Alibaba Group Holding Limited — meaning it keeps 39. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ZGM leads at 48. 2% versus 14. 1% for BABA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ZGM leads at 77. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — ZGM or BABA?
In this comparison, BABA (1.
3% yield) pays a dividend. ZGM does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is ZGM or BABA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.
21), 1. 3% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BABA: +84. 5%, ZGM: -27. 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.
08What are the main differences between ZGM and BABA?
These companies operate in different sectors (ZGM (Industrials) and BABA (Consumer Cyclical)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ZGM is a small-cap high-growth stock; BABA is a large-cap deep-value stock. BABA pays a dividend while ZGM does 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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.