Every figure this model derived for EQPT, 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
cash
443,000,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
2,210,000,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
914,000,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
1,212,000,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
285,000,000
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2025-12-31
ocf
264,000,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
4,379,000,000
Revenues
2025-12-31
sbc
4,000,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
EQPT on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
15.21
current ratio
2.54
current ratio reported
2.42
dilution pct
193.72
ebit cagr
8.99
ebit yoy
36.24
fcf margin
6.03
interest cover
1.04
net debt ebitda
5.15
operating margin
6.78
owner earnings margin
5.94
revenue growth
16.34
revenue growth per share
-60.39
roic
5.07
rule of 40
23.12
sbc pct revenue
0.09
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about EQPT's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
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
share count is from 2025-12-31 (242 days old, balance sheet); a stock split since then would make the market cap wrong. Set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml to be sure.
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 rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: worst year
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth