Every figure this model derived for AIDX, 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 2025-12-31.
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
cash
4,546,140
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
5,075,623
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
2,551,236
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
1,620,700
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
156,207
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2025-12-31
ocf
-1,919,720
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
2,045,133
Revenues
2025-12-31
sbc
516,180
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
AIDX on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-134.54
current ratio
2.44
current ratio reported
1.99
dilution pct
2.7
fcf margin
-93.87
interest cover
-21.32
operating margin
-162.87
owner earnings margin
-119.11
revenue growth
16.71
revenue growth per share
13.63
rule of 40
-146.16
sbc pct revenue
25.24
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about AIDX's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
no current capital expenditure tagged; treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
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
durability DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, gross margin stability, cash flow stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth
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