Every figure this model derived for KRP, 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.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
capex
0
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2019-03-31
cash
44,931,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
100,794,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
13,801,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
interest expense
35,459,000
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2026-06-30
ocf
237,722,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
341,094,000
Revenues
2026-06-30
sbc
16,761,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
KRP on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
80.97
current ratio
7.3
current ratio reported
7.3
ebit cagr
0.01
fcf margin
69.69
growth cv
1.07
interest cover
3.86
operating margin
40.15
owner earnings margin
64.78
revenue growth
6.17
revenue growth per share
6.17
rule of 40
46.32
sbc pct revenue
4.91
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about KRP's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2019-03-31); 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 2017-02-07 (3491 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.
invested capital is 0M (cash exceeds equity plus debt), so return on capital is unbounded rather than undefined; scored as maximal
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 DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (contracted coverage, gross margin 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: margin recent
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