Every figure this model derived for MPLXP, 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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
MPLXP on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
59.51
current ratio
0.89
current ratio reported
0.89
deferred revenue growth
150.0
ebit cagr
5.27
ebit yoy
11.35
fcf margin
33.79
growth cv
0.85
interest cover
4.82
operating margin
59.51
owner earnings margin
33.79
revenue growth
3.09
revenue growth per share
3.09
roic
53.75
rpo growth
-20.31
rule of 40
62.6
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about MPLXP's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current stock compensation tagged (last tagged 2021-09-30); treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
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
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: gross margin stability