vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of PERDOCEO EDUCATION Corp (PRDO) and Zai Lab Ltd (ZLAB). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
PERDOCEO EDUCATION Corp is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($211.6M vs $127.1M, roughly 1.7× Zai Lab Ltd). On growth, PERDOCEO EDUCATION Corp posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (20.0% vs 17.1%). PERDOCEO EDUCATION Corp produced more free cash flow last quarter ($37.9M vs $-26.7M). Over the past eight quarters, Zai Lab Ltd's revenue compounded faster (20.8% CAGR vs 12.2%).
Perdoceo Education Corporation (PRDO) is a public company that owns five for-profit universities in the United States: American Intercontinental University, Colorado Technical University, California Southern University, Trident University International, and University of St. Augustine for Health Sciences. The company was previously known as Career Education Corporation.
Zai Lab Ltd is a global biopharmaceutical company focused on developing, manufacturing and commercializing innovative therapies for oncology, autoimmune disorders, infectious diseases and other unmet medical needs. It operates primarily in the Greater China region and partners with leading global biotech firms to expand access to life-saving treatments for underserved patient populations.
PRDO vs ZLAB — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q4 FY2025 vs Q4 FY2025
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $211.6M | $127.1M |
| Net Profit | — | — |
| Gross Margin | — | 51.0% |
| Operating Margin | 19.8% | -54.6% |
| Net Margin | — | — |
| Revenue YoY | 20.0% | 17.1% |
| Net Profit YoY | — | — |
| EPS (diluted) | $0.55 | $-0.05 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q4 25 | $211.6M | $127.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $211.9M | $115.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $209.6M | $109.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $213.0M | $105.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $176.4M | $108.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $169.8M | $101.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $166.7M | $100.1M | ||
| Q1 24 | $168.3M | $87.1M |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | $39.9M | $-36.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $41.0M | $-40.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $43.7M | $-48.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | $38.3M | $-41.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $38.4M | $-80.3M | ||
| Q1 24 | $39.4M | $-53.5M |
| Q4 25 | — | 51.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 59.5% | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 60.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 63.6% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | 61.5% | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 64.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 64.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | — | 61.4% |
| Q4 25 | 19.8% | -54.6% | ||
| Q3 25 | 24.1% | -42.3% | ||
| Q2 25 | 24.5% | -50.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 24.3% | -53.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 21.1% | -62.6% | ||
| Q3 24 | 26.4% | -66.6% | ||
| Q2 24 | 27.6% | -76.0% | ||
| Q1 24 | 27.5% | -80.7% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.8% | -31.2% | ||
| Q2 25 | 19.6% | -37.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 20.5% | -45.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 22.5% | -40.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 23.0% | -80.2% | ||
| Q1 24 | 23.4% | -61.4% |
| Q4 25 | $0.55 | $-0.05 | ||
| Q3 25 | $0.60 | $-0.03 | ||
| Q2 25 | $0.62 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q1 25 | $0.65 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q4 24 | $0.46 | $-0.09 | ||
| Q3 24 | $0.57 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q2 24 | $0.57 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q1 24 | $0.59 | $-0.05 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $111.0M | $689.6M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | — | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $972.4M | $715.5M |
| Total Assets | $1.2B | $1.2B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | — | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $111.0M | $689.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $159.5M | $717.2M | ||
| Q2 25 | $172.1M | $732.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $132.1M | $757.3M | ||
| Q4 24 | $109.1M | $779.7M | ||
| Q3 24 | $238.0M | $616.1M | ||
| Q2 24 | $127.9M | $630.0M | ||
| Q1 24 | $125.8M | $650.8M |
| Q4 25 | $972.4M | $715.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $997.9M | $759.9M | ||
| Q2 25 | $984.6M | $791.7M | ||
| Q1 25 | $970.3M | $810.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $959.5M | $840.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $935.4M | $667.7M | ||
| Q2 24 | $899.5M | $704.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $866.1M | $762.2M |
| Q4 25 | $1.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.3B | $1.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.2B | $1.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.1B | $985.3M | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.1B | $987.4M | ||
| Q1 24 | $1.1B | $988.4M |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | $40.1M | $-26.0M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $37.9M | $-26.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | 17.9% | -21.0% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.1% | 0.5% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $216.7M | $-158.9M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q4 25 | $40.1M | $-26.0M | ||
| Q3 25 | $41.2M | $-32.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $78.8M | $-31.0M | ||
| Q1 25 | $65.1M | $-61.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $17.6M | $-55.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $51.0M | $-26.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $38.5M | $-42.2M | ||
| Q1 24 | $54.5M | $-90.1M |
| Q4 25 | $37.9M | $-26.7M | ||
| Q3 25 | $39.4M | $-35.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $76.0M | $-33.9M | ||
| Q1 25 | $63.4M | $-63.2M | ||
| Q4 24 | $16.0M | $-58.4M | ||
| Q3 24 | $50.0M | $-28.2M | ||
| Q2 24 | $37.7M | $-42.9M | ||
| Q1 24 | $53.3M | $-91.1M |
| Q4 25 | 17.9% | -21.0% | ||
| Q3 25 | 18.6% | -30.4% | ||
| Q2 25 | 36.3% | -31.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 29.8% | -59.9% | ||
| Q4 24 | 9.1% | -53.8% | ||
| Q3 24 | 29.4% | -27.7% | ||
| Q2 24 | 22.6% | -42.9% | ||
| Q1 24 | 31.7% | -104.5% |
| Q4 25 | 1.1% | 0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 0.9% | 2.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.3% | 2.6% | ||
| Q1 25 | 0.8% | 1.5% | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.9% | 2.4% | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.6% | 1.3% | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.5% | 0.7% | ||
| Q1 24 | 0.7% | 1.1% |
| Q4 25 | — | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.03× | — | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.92× | — | ||
| Q1 25 | 1.49× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | — | — | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.33× | — | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.00× | — | ||
| Q1 24 | 1.38× | — |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
PRDO
| CTU | $107.0M | 51% |
| AIUS | $60.8M | 29% |
| University Of St Augustine For Health Sciences Llc | $43.7M | 21% |
| Other | $1.1M | 1% |
ZLAB
| Zejula | $56.0M | 44% |
| Other | $21.9M | 17% |
| Nuzyra | $16.0M | 13% |
| Optune | $11.9M | 9% |
| XACDURO | $10.7M | 8% |
| Qinlock | $9.7M | 8% |
| AUGTYRO | $836.0K | 1% |
