Every figure this model derived for BAM, 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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
BAM on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
46.66
ebit cagr
3.02
ebit yoy
1.06
ev ebit
13.51
ev owner earnings
10.69
ev sales
5.67
fcf margin
56.45
interest cover
15.08
net debt ebitda
1.46
operating margin
41.97
owner earnings margin
53.03
revenue growth
11.94
revenue growth per share
11.94
roic
11.54
rule of 40
53.91
sbc pct revenue
3.42
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about BAM's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
operating income last tagged 2022-12-31, 1277 days before the revenue period (2026-06-30); dropped rather than divided by current revenue
no operating income tagged; derived as revenue minus CostsAndExpenses
no usable diluted share count, so growth is measured on total revenue rather than per share; a company issuing shares to fund that growth reads better than it is
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 DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, contracted coverage, gross margin 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