Every figure this model derived for COYA, 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
cash
43,181,002
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
47,057,737
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
3,512,431
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
43,276,011
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
ocf
-15,722,176
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
8,019,145
Revenues
2026-06-30
sbc
5,313,947
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
COYA on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-222.19
current ratio
20.65
current ratio reported
13.4
deferred revenue growth
68.72
dilution pct
9.79
fcf margin
-196.06
operating margin
-288.7
owner earnings margin
-262.32
revenue growth
1793.76
revenue growth per share
1624.83
roic
-19250.05
rule of 40
1505.06
sbc pct revenue
66.27
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about COYA's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current capital expenditure tagged; treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
no debt and no profit, so interest cover cannot be measured; scored on cash runway instead: 43M of net cash against a 16M annual burn is 2.7 years
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 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, gross margin stability 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 (sustained growth, margin trend not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
3 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability, growth -- 55% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left