Every figure this model derived for AIXC, 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
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2023-06-30
cash
3,343,324
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
6,337,008
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
1,721,003
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
5,681,796
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
988,501
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2025-12-31
ocf
-12,203,860
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
723,937
SellingAndMarketingExpense
2026-06-30
sbc
268
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
AIXC on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-2222.08
current ratio
3.68
current ratio reported
3.68
dilution pct
566.77
fcf margin
-1685.76
interest cover
-16.27
operating margin
-2222.11
owner earnings margin
-1685.8
sbc pct revenue
0.04
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about AIXC's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: net margin -- net margin came out at -3,163% against a scale that tops out near 1,500%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 723,937 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
only 180 days of filings, not a full year: margins and growth are measured, but return on capital and every enterprise-value multiple are refused rather than annualised
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2023-06-30); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
gross profit last tagged 2021-12-31 and no cost of sales line to rebuild it from; dropped from durability
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 ebit, 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 (contracted coverage, gross margin stability, cash flow stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
growth DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (revenue growth, sustained growth not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
3 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability, growth -- 55% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left