Every figure this model derived for AHR, 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 2026-06-30.
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
0
PaymentsToAcquireOtherPropertyPlantAndEquipment
2021-09-30
cash
156,896,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
equity
3,694,547,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
77,620,000
InterestExpense
2026-06-30
ocf
362,037,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
2,502,041,000
Revenues
2026-06-30
sbc
19,505,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
AHR on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
29.71
dilution pct
27.74
ebit cagr
14.18
ebit yoy
22.98
ev ebit
25.1
ev owner earnings
35.19
ev sales
4.82
fcf margin
14.47
growth cv
0.63
interest cover
6.19
operating margin
19.19
owner earnings margin
13.69
revenue growth
16.39
revenue growth per share
-8.88
roic
10.72
rule of 40
35.58
sbc pct revenue
0.78
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about AHR's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2021-09-30); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
gross profit not tagged; rebuilt from Revenues - CostOfGoodsAndServicesSold
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`
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: contracted coverage
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: liquidity