Every figure this model derived for AAME, the value it took, and
the element in the company's own XBRL it was read from — so any of it can be checked
against the filing rather than taken on trust.
As at 2025-09-30.
The figures, and where each came from
This is the part no other screener shows. Each figure below names the XBRL element it
was read from, so it can be checked against the filing itself.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
capex
564,000
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2025-09-30
cash
34,444,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-09-30
equity
109,488,000
StockholdersEquity
2025-09-30
interest expense
3,154,000
InterestExpense
2025-09-30
ocf
4,800,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2024-12-31
revenue
208,218,000
Revenues
2025-09-30
sbc
4,000
AllocatedShareBasedCompensationExpense
2025-09-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
AAME on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-2.21
dilution pct
-0.02
fcf margin
2.03
interest cover
-1.57
operating margin
-2.38
owner earnings margin
2.03
revenue growth
11.99
revenue growth per share
12.01
roic
-5.22
rule of 40
9.61
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about AAME's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
operating income is annual, not TTM
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2025-10-31 (303 days old, dei cover page); a stock split since then would make the market cap wrong. Set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml to be sure.
no forward EPS estimate; growth rests on filings only. Analyst consensus is not published in XBRL, so it has to be fetched from a data provider or set by hand in overrides.yaml as `eps_growth_2y`
valuation DROPPED from the total: only 0 of 2 inputs could be computed (ev sales, ev owner earnings not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
durability DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (contracted coverage, gross margin stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: liquidity
2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability -- 35% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left