Every figure this model derived for MKC-V, 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 2026-05-31.
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.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
capex
221,800,000
PaymentsToAcquireProductiveAssets
2025-11-30
cash
331,200,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-05-31
current assets
2,788,800,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-05-31
current liabilities
3,571,800,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-05-31
equity
6,995,600,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-05-31
interest expense
206,700,000
InterestExpense
2026-05-31
ocf
1,231,500,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-05-31
revenue
7,385,800,000
Revenues
2026-05-31
sbc
45,900,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-05-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
MKC-V on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
19.04
current ratio
0.78
current ratio reported
0.78
dilution pct
-0.07
ebit cagr
7.26
ebit yoy
3.76
fcf margin
13.67
growth cv
1.1
interest cover
5.34
net debt ebitda
2.48
operating margin
14.94
owner earnings margin
13.05
revenue growth
9.54
revenue growth per share
9.62
roic
8.4
rule of 40
24.48
sbc pct revenue
0.62
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about MKC-V's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
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: contracted coverage