Every figure this model derived for GTLB, 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 2026-04-30.
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
GTLB on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
16.08
current ratio
14.89
current ratio reported
2.55
deferred revenue growth
18.27
dilution pct
3.87
fcf margin
26.22
growth cv
0.39
operating margin
-5.14
owner earnings margin
5.4
revenue growth
24.9
revenue growth per share
20.24
roic
-6.31
rpo growth
15.17
rule of 40
19.76
sbc pct revenue
20.82
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about GTLB's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-04-30 (122 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 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
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: interest cover