DataMeds AI, Inc. (MEDS)

Every figure this model derived for MEDS, 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.

The ratios

The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up MEDS on one particular measure came for.

Everything else this filing tags

227 more elements from MEDS's own XBRL that this model has no measure for, newest reading each, largest first. Nothing here is converted, added up or renamed — it is the filing's own element names and the filing's own numbers.

What to be careful about

What this model itself distrusts about MEDS's figures. Written by the derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.

• no current capital expenditure tagged; treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
• diluted share count moved +50% in a year (47M to 71M, a ratio of 1.50), which is a stock split rather than issuance; growth is measured on total revenue, not per share
• there is no operating profit to value; valuation rests on EV/revenue (7.1x) instead
• analyst estimate not used: trailing EPS is not positive, so a growth rate would be meaningless
• 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 DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (sustained growth, margin trend not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
• 2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (durability, growth -- 30% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left