Every figure this model derived for MF, 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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
MF on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
22.19
current ratio
20.55
current ratio reported
20.55
dilution pct
362.71
ev owner earnings
-30.46
ev sales
12.84
fcf margin
-9.55
interest cover
-92.81
operating margin
-10.47
owner earnings margin
-42.16
revenue growth
-42.49
revenue growth per share
-87.57
roic
-9.05
rule of 40
-52.96
sbc pct revenue
32.61
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about MF's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
there is no operating profit to value; valuation rests on EV/revenue (12.8x) instead
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`
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: contracted coverage
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth