Every figure this model derived for IMAA, 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 2026-01-31.
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
capex
0
PaymentsToAcquireOtherProductiveAssets
2024-04-30
cash
397
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-01-31
current assets
26,532
AssetsCurrent
2026-01-31
current liabilities
278,966
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-01-31
equity
-82,873
StockholdersEquity
2026-01-31
ocf
-36,682
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-01-31
revenue
83,526
Revenues
2026-01-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
IMAA on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-6.46
current ratio
0.1
current ratio reported
0.1
dilution pct
18.72
fcf margin
-43.92
operating margin
-74.62
owner earnings margin
-43.92
revenue growth
98.99
revenue growth per share
67.62
rule of 40
24.37
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about IMAA's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2024-04-30); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-03-25 (158 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.
gross profit not tagged; rebuilt from Revenues - CostOfRevenue
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 0.0 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 rests on 4 of 5 inputs; not tagged: roic
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
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 rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth
2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability -- 35% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left