LHYFE (F1B.F)
Every figure this model derived for F1B.F, 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 2024-12-31.
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 | 27,081,000 | PurchaseOfPropertyPlantAndEquipmentClassifiedAsInvestingActivities |
2024-12-31 |
| cash | 72,124,000 | CashAndCashEquivalents |
2025-01-01 |
| current assets | 95,844,000 | CurrentAssets |
2025-01-01 |
| current liabilities | 51,421,000 | CurrentLiabilities |
2025-01-01 |
| equity | 71,838,000 | EquityAttributableToOwnersOfParent |
2025-01-01 |
| ocf | -26,971,000 | CashFlowsFromUsedInOperatingActivities |
2024-12-31 |
| revenue | 5,099,000 | Revenue |
2024-12-31 |
| sbc | -1,373,000 | AdjustmentsForSharebasedPayments |
2024-12-31 |
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up F1B.F on one particular measure came for.
| Ratio | Value |
|---|---|
| cash operating margin | -595.74 |
| current ratio | 1.86 |
| current ratio reported | 1.86 |
| fcf margin | -1060.05 |
| growth cv | 0.32 |
| operating margin | -568.82 |
| owner earnings margin | -1033.12 |
| revenue growth | 287.17 |
| revenue growth per share | 287.17 |
| rule of 40 | -281.65 |
| sbc pct revenue | -26.93 |
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about F1B.F's figures. Written by the derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
- newest fact in the filing is 2025-01-01 (1y old); this company's data is not usable and the scores below should be ignored
- revenue is annual, not TTM
- operating income is annual, not TTM
- revenue period ends 2024-12-31 (625 days ago) - the tag chain found nothing recent, so treat this row as unscored
- no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
- 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 debt and no profit, so interest cover cannot be measured; scored on cash runway instead: 72M of net cash against a 54M annual burn is 1.3 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`
- quality rests on 4 of 5 inputs; not tagged: roic
- 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 (contracted coverage, gross margin stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
- growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth
- 2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability -- 35% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left