Every figure this model derived for GMM, 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 2025-09-30.
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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
GMM on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
41.94
current ratio
1.93
current ratio reported
1.1
deferred revenue growth
75.28
ebit cagr
21.11
ebit yoy
-55.98
fcf margin
39.5
growth cv
0.35
interest cover
15.22
operating margin
5.37
owner earnings margin
24.26
revenue growth
35.25
revenue growth per share
35.25
roic
4.1
rule of 40
40.62
sbc pct revenue
15.24
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about GMM's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2025-03-31 (517 days old, weighted average diluted); a stock split since then would make the market cap wrong. Set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml to be sure.
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 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