GENUS PLC (GNS.L)
Every figure this model derived for GNS.L, 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 2025-06-30.
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 | 13,400,000 | PurchaseOfPropertyPlantAndEquipmentClassifiedAsInvestingActivities |
2025-06-30 |
| cash | 48,000,000 | CashAndCashEquivalents |
2025-07-01 |
| current assets | 254,400,000 | CurrentAssets |
2025-07-01 |
| current liabilities | 131,300,000 | CurrentLiabilities |
2025-07-01 |
| equity | 476,100,000 | EquityAttributableToOwnersOfParent |
2025-07-01 |
| interest expense | 21,400,000 | FinanceCosts |
2025-06-30 |
| ocf | 67,200,000 | CashFlowsFromUsedInOperatingActivities |
2025-06-30 |
| revenue | 672,800,000 | Revenue |
2025-06-30 |
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up GNS.L on one particular measure came for.
| Ratio | Value |
|---|---|
| cash operating margin | 6.3 |
| current ratio | 1.94 |
| current ratio reported | 1.94 |
| ebit cagr | -4.96 |
| ebit yoy | 562.5 |
| ev ebit | 37.82 |
| ev owner earnings | 29.81 |
| ev sales | 2.38 |
| fcf margin | 8.0 |
| growth cv | 1.82 |
| interest cover | 1.98 |
| net debt ebitda | 3.96 |
| operating margin | 6.3 |
| owner earnings margin | 8.0 |
| revenue growth | 0.6 |
| revenue growth per share | 0.6 |
| roic | 5.2 |
| rule of 40 | 6.9 |
| sbc pct revenue | 0.0 |
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about GNS.L'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 stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
- share count is from 2025-06-30 (444 days old, dei cover page); 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`
- 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