Neo-Concept International Group Holdings Limited (NCI)
Every figure this model derived for NCI, 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
514,944
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2025-12-31
cash
299,730
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-12-31
current assets
6,753,874
AssetsCurrent
2025-12-31
current liabilities
2,588,354
LiabilitiesCurrent
2025-12-31
equity
7,271,904
StockholdersEquity
2025-12-31
interest expense
173,383
InterestPaidNet
2025-12-31
ocf
2,746,238
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
17,633,567
Revenues
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
NCI on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
2.58
current ratio
2.61
current ratio reported
2.61
dilution pct
3.66
ebit cagr
-55.23
ebit yoy
-84.43
fcf margin
12.65
interest cover
1.34
net debt ebitda
2.03
operating margin
1.32
owner earnings margin
12.65
revenue growth
-41.88
revenue growth per share
-43.93
roic
2.24
rule of 40
-40.56
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about NCI'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 stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2025-12-31 (242 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 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 (worst year, contracted coverage not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth
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