Every figure this model derived for IE, 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 2026-06-30.
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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
IE on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
927.69
current ratio
5.05
current ratio reported
5.05
deferred revenue growth
-100.0
dilution pct
10.98
ev ebit
112.15
ev owner earnings
-13.65
ev sales
532.16
growth cv
14.66
interest cover
5.13
operating margin
474.5
revenue growth
-20.57
revenue growth per share
-28.43
roic
4.21
rule of 40
453.92
sbc pct revenue
365.33
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about IE's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: owner earnings margin, fcf margin, ocf margin -- owner earnings margin came out at -3,897% against a scale that tops out near 1,750%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 3,023,000 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
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 rests on 4 of 5 inputs; not tagged: owner earnings
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: contracted coverage