Every figure this model derived for MASK, 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 2025-06-30.
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
cash
35,284
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-12-31
current assets
9,753,049
AssetsCurrent
2025-12-31
current liabilities
3,236,517
LiabilitiesCurrent
2025-12-31
equity
8,559,410
StockholdersEquity
2025-12-31
interest expense
167,230
InterestExpense
2025-12-31
ocf
13,832
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-06-30
revenue
4,835,167
Revenues
2025-06-30
sbc
42,740
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
MASK on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
47.01
current ratio
3.01
current ratio reported
3.01
dilution pct
5.98
ebit cagr
933.14
ebit yoy
136.13
fcf margin
0.29
interest cover
11.54
net debt ebitda
1.24
operating margin
39.93
owner earnings margin
-0.6
revenue growth
462.66
revenue growth per share
430.91
roic
13.46
rule of 40
502.58
sbc pct revenue
0.88
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about MASK'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 capital expenditure tagged; 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 2025-12-31 (242 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.
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: worst year
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth