Every figure this model derived for GVH, 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.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
capex
8,333
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2025-09-30
cash
7,505,388
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-09-30
current assets
9,960,161
AssetsCurrent
2025-09-30
current liabilities
1,177,197
LiabilitiesCurrent
2025-09-30
equity
10,036,664
StockholdersEquity
2025-09-30
interest expense
995
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2025-09-30
ocf
240,355
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-09-30
revenue
23,563,957
Revenues
2025-09-30
sbc
36,788
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-09-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
GVH on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
4.52
current ratio
8.53
current ratio reported
8.46
dilution pct
481.93
ebit cagr
14.17
ebit yoy
-28.51
fcf margin
0.98
growth cv
1.39
interest cover
962.82
operating margin
4.07
owner earnings margin
0.83
revenue growth
42.46
revenue growth per share
-75.52
roic
29.9
rule of 40
46.53
sbc pct revenue
0.16
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about GVH'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 2025-09-30 (334 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 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