Every figure this model derived for MGRX, 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
2023-12-31
cash
228,688
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
245,687
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
1,398,063
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
12,525,944
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
103,513
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2025-12-31
ocf
-3,890,874
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-30
revenue
315,227
Revenues
2026-06-30
sbc
2,168,853
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
MGRX on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
current ratio
0.18
current ratio reported
0.18
fcf margin
-1234.31
growth cv
1.43
interest cover
-116.6
revenue growth
-38.91
revenue growth per share
-38.91
roic
-77.26
rule of 40
-3867.91
sbc pct revenue
688.03
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about MGRX's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: operating margin, cash operating margin, owner earnings margin, net margin, ebitda margin -- net margin came out at -4,791% against a scale that tops out near 1,500%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 315,227 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2023-12-31); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
diluted share count moved +410% in a year (2M to 10M, a ratio of 5.09), which is a stock split rather than issuance; growth is measured on total revenue, not per share
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 2 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, 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 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: contracted coverage
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth
2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation -- 55% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left