Every figure this model derived for MLCO, 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 2025-12-31.
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
0
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2019-12-31
cash
1,023,199,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-12-31
current assets
1,269,200,000
AssetsCurrent
2025-12-31
current liabilities
1,184,312,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2025-12-31
equity
-1,246,602,000
StockholdersEquity
2025-12-31
interest expense
464,904,000
InterestExpense
2025-12-31
ocf
818,115,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
5,163,299,000
Revenues
2025-12-31
sbc
29,270,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
MLCO on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
21.62
current ratio
1.07
current ratio reported
1.07
dilution pct
-7.51
ebit yoy
23.89
fcf margin
15.84
growth cv
1.84
interest cover
1.29
net debt ebitda
5.43
operating margin
11.63
owner earnings margin
15.28
revenue growth
11.32
revenue growth per share
20.36
roic
10.18
rule of 40
22.95
sbc pct revenue
0.57
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about MLCO'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 (last tagged 2019-12-31); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2025-12-31 (242 days old, dei cover page); 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 DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (contracted coverage, gross margin stability not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability -- 35% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left