Every figure this model derived for MMMW, 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 2015-01-31.
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
2013-04-30
current assets
3,245
AssetsCurrent
2024-01-31
current liabilities
416,552
LiabilitiesCurrent
2024-01-31
equity
-413,307
StockholdersEquity
2024-01-31
interest expense
12,096
InterestPaid
2015-01-31
revenue
0
Revenues
2015-01-31
sbc
0
ShareBasedCompensation
2023-04-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
MMMW on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
current ratio
0.01
current ratio reported
0.01
deferred revenue growth
0.0
interest cover
-32.16
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about MMMW's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
newest fact in the filing is 2024-01-31 (2y old); this company's data is not usable and the scores below should be ignored
operating cash flow last tagged 2024-01-31, -3287 days before the revenue period (2015-01-31); dropped rather than divided by current revenue
only 275 days of filings, not a full year: margins and growth are measured, but return on capital and every enterprise-value multiple are refused rather than annualised
revenue period ends 2015-01-31 (4229 days ago) - the tag chain found nothing recent, so treat this row as unscored
no current stock compensation tagged (last tagged 2023-04-30); treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2013-04-30); 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 2024-01-31 (942 days old, weighted average diluted); a stock split since then would make the market cap wrong. Set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml to be sure.
no usable diluted share count, so growth is measured on total revenue rather than per share; a company issuing shares to fund that growth reads better than it is
gross profit last tagged 2013-04-30 and no cost of sales line to rebuild it from; dropped from durability
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 0 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, sbc discipline, 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 ebit, 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 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 0 of 4 inputs could be computed (revenue growth, sustained growth, margin trend, margin recent not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
4 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation, durability, growth -- 85% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left