Every figure this model derived for GRHI, 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 2025-12-31.
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
cash
99,893
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
152,121
AssetsCurrent
2025-12-31
current liabilities
146,100
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
53,793
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
ocf
-110,151
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
211,500
Revenues
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
GRHI on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
current ratio
1.04
current ratio reported
1.04
dilution pct
0.37
fcf margin
-52.08
owner earnings margin
-52.08
revenue growth
52.71
revenue growth per share
52.15
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about GRHI's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
no operating income found in XBRL
no current stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no current capital expenditure tagged; treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
no debt and no profit, so interest cover cannot be measured; scored on cash runway instead: 0M of net cash against a 0M annual burn is 0.9 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 DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, cash operating margin not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
valuation DROPPED from the total: only 0 of 2 inputs could be computed (ev ebit, 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 0 of 4 inputs could be computed (worst year, contracted coverage, gross margin stability, cash flow stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
growth DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (sustained growth, margin trend, margin recent not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
4 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation, durability, growth -- 85% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left