Every figure this model derived for CCS, 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
33,241,000
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2026-06-30
cash
92,334,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
equity
2,565,751,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
81,300,000
InterestExpenseDebt
2025-12-31
ocf
68,267,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
3,930,760,000
Revenues
2026-06-30
sbc
19,067,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
CCS on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
dilution pct
-5.46
fcf margin
0.89
growth cv
2.6
owner earnings margin
0.41
revenue growth
-8.89
revenue growth per share
-3.63
sbc pct revenue
0.49
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about CCS's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
operating income last tagged 2016-12-31, 3468 days before the revenue period (2026-06-30); dropped rather than divided by current revenue
presents no operating result, and rebuilding it from the statement missed the reported pre-tax profit by 83.42% of revenue, so it is refused rather than used (no value anywhere for CostOfRevenue)
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
gross profit last tagged 2017-12-31 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 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 (contracted coverage, gross margin stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
resilience DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 3 inputs could be computed (interest cover, liquidity 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 (margin trend, margin recent not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
5 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation, durability, resilience, growth -- 100% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left