Every figure this model derived for FUST, 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
0
PaymentsToAcquireProductiveAssets
2018-09-30
cash
17,901
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
35,904
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
326,154
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
-290,250
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
6,548
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2026-06-30
ocf
-199,769
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
7,683
Revenues
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
FUST on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-2406.4
current ratio
0.11
current ratio reported
0.11
deferred revenue growth
-100.0
dilution pct
0.11
interest cover
-28.24
operating margin
-2406.4
revenue growth
-95.63
revenue growth per share
-95.64
rule of 40
-2502.03
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about FUST's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: owner earnings margin, fcf margin, net margin, ocf margin -- owner earnings margin came out at -2,600% against a scale that tops out near 1,750%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 7,683 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
no current stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2018-09-30); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
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 3 of 5 inputs; not tagged: roic, owner earnings
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: contracted coverage