ATEGRITY SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY HOLDINGS (ASIC)
Every figure this model derived for ASIC, 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
PaymentsToAcquireOtherProductiveAssets
2026-06-30
cash
262,246,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
equity
664,394,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
472,000
InterestExpense
2026-06-30
ocf
177,334,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
516,885,000
Revenues
2026-06-30
sbc
922,000
AllocatedShareBasedCompensationExpense
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
ASIC on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
28.07
dilution pct
26.18
ebit cagr
67.73
ebit yoy
73.11
fcf margin
34.31
interest cover
304.16
operating margin
27.77
owner earnings margin
34.13
revenue growth
36.63
revenue growth per share
8.29
roic
28.2
rule of 40
64.41
sbc pct revenue
0.18
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about ASIC's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no operating income tagged; derived as revenue minus BenefitsLossesAndExpenses
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`
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 0 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, contracted coverage, gross margin stability, cash flow stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: liquidity
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