Every figure this model derived for ARBEW, 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
capex
266,000
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2025-12-31
cash
44,718,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-12-31
current assets
71,779,000
AssetsCurrent
2025-12-31
current liabilities
32,916,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2025-12-31
equity
39,569,000
StockholdersEquity
2025-12-31
interest expense
287,000
InterestPaidNet
2025-12-31
ocf
-38,160,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
1,026,000
Revenues
2025-12-31
sbc
9,142,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
ARBEW on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
current ratio
2.18
current ratio reported
2.18
deferred revenue growth
-51.65
dilution pct
37.63
growth cv
2.11
interest cover
-167.02
revenue growth
33.59
revenue growth per share
-2.93
rpo growth
-11.38
rule of 40
-4638.34
sbc pct revenue
891.03
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about ARBEW's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: operating margin, cash operating margin, owner earnings margin, fcf margin, net margin, ocf margin, ebitda margin -- operating margin came out at -4,672% against a scale that tops out near 2,500%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 1,026,000 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-03-01 (182 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 DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, owner earnings, cash operating margin not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
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
2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation -- 55% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left