Every figure this model derived for KNOP, 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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
KNOP on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
56.07
current ratio
0.26
current ratio reported
0.26
deferred revenue growth
-22.35
ebit cagr
3.57
ebit yoy
16.09
fcf margin
42.73
growth cv
1.14
interest cover
1.36
operating margin
23.23
owner earnings margin
42.73
revenue growth
14.39
revenue growth per share
14.39
roic
429.91
rule of 40
37.62
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about KNOP's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
no current stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2023-06-30); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
no usable diluted share count, so growth is measured on total revenue rather than per share; a company issuing shares to fund that growth reads better than it is
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
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: gross margin stability