Every figure this model derived for AGSS, 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 2026-03-31.
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
0
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2013-12-31
cash
215,949
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-03-31
current assets
2,293,092
AssetsCurrent
2026-03-31
current liabilities
8,138,128
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-03-31
equity
-4,389,865
StockholdersEquity
2026-03-31
interest expense
651
InterestPaidNet
2025-12-31
ocf
942,094
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-03-31
revenue
19,789,971
Revenues
2026-03-31
sbc
0
ShareBasedCompensation
2021-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
AGSS on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-11.55
current ratio
0.31
current ratio reported
0.28
deferred revenue growth
-9.0
dilution pct
-5.86
fcf margin
4.76
growth cv
1.91
interest cover
-4117.02
operating margin
-13.54
owner earnings margin
4.76
revenue growth
-28.6
revenue growth per share
-24.16
rule of 40
-42.15
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about AGSS's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current stock compensation tagged (last tagged 2021-12-31); treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2013-12-31); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-03-31 (152 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`
quality rests on 4 of 5 inputs; not tagged: roic
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