Every figure this model derived for LXP, 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 2026-03-31.
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
LXP on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
dilution pct
0.44
revenue growth
1.46
revenue growth per share
1.02
sbc pct revenue
261.49
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about LXP's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: owner earnings margin, fcf margin, net margin, ocf margin -- fcf margin came out at 4,577% against a scale that tops out near 2,500%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 4,090,000 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
presents no operating result; summing the costs it tags misses its own pre-tax profit by 5023.6% of revenue, far more than interest can explain, so a cost line it does not tag is missing and the sum was refused rather than used
no operating income found in XBRL
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2018-12-31); 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 2026-04-28 (124 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 RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTax - CostOfGoodsAndServicesSold
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 DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, owner earnings, cash operating margin not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
valuation DROPPED from the total: only 0 of 2 inputs could be computed (ev ebit, 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: contracted coverage
resilience DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 3 inputs could be computed (interest cover, liquidity not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
growth DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (margin trend, margin recent not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
4 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation, resilience, growth -- 90% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left