Every figure this model derived for GLXY, 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
1,532,749,000
PaymentsToAcquireProductiveAssets
2026-06-30
cash
1,553,695,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
7,238,447,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
4,813,168,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
1,823,366,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
73,610,000
InterestExpenseDebt
2026-06-30
ocf
-316,636,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
57,367,747,000
Revenues
2026-06-30
sbc
60,562,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
GLXY on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-2.24
current ratio
1.5
current ratio reported
1.5
dilution pct
2.74
fcf margin
-3.22
interest cover
-18.69
operating margin
-2.4
owner earnings margin
-3.33
revenue growth
24.67
revenue growth per share
21.35
roic
-153.8
rule of 40
22.27
sbc pct revenue
0.11
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about GLXY's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no operating income tagged; derived as revenue minus OperatingExpenses
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2025-03-31 (517 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 DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, 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