Bullish (BLSH)

Every figure this model derived for BLSH, 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	9,931,000	`PurchaseOfPropertyPlantAndEquipmentClassifiedAsInvestingActivities`	2025-12-31
cash	87,892,000	`CashAndCashEquivalents`	2025-12-31
current assets	3,804,066,000	`CurrentAssets`	2025-12-31
current liabilities	129,912,000	`CurrentLiabilities`	2025-12-31
equity	3,216,187,000	`EquityAttributableToOwnersOfParent`	2025-12-31
interest expense	52,369,000	`FinanceCosts`	2025-12-31
ocf	28,632,000	`CashFlowsFromUsedInOperatingActivities`	2025-12-31
revenue	244,811,387,000	`Revenue`	2025-12-31
sbc	15,345,000	`ExpenseFromSharebasedPaymentTransactionsWithEmployees`	2025-12-31

The ratios

The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up BLSH on one particular measure came for.

Ratio	Value
current ratio	29.28
current ratio reported	29.28
dilution pct	10.69
fcf margin	0.01
owner earnings margin	0.0
revenue growth	-2.15
revenue growth per share	-11.6
sbc pct revenue	0.01

What to be careful about

What this model itself distrusts about BLSH's figures. Written by the derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.

revenue is annual, not TTM
no operating income found in XBRL
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2025-12-31 (242 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.
gross profit not tagged; rebuilt from Revenue - CostOfSales
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 2 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, 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 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 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, contracted coverage 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: interest cover
growth DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (sustained growth, margin trend, margin recent not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
4 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation, durability, growth -- 85% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left