Every figure this model derived for NIKI, 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 2023-12-31.
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
3,015
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2023-12-31
cash
3,555,372
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-12-31
current assets
3,592,524
AssetsCurrent
2025-12-31
current liabilities
4,593,823
LiabilitiesCurrent
2025-12-31
equity
23,115,160
StockholdersEquity
2025-12-31
interest expense
90,000
InterestExpenseOperating
2024-06-30
revenue
431,378
Revenues
2023-12-31
sbc
1,265,189
ShareBasedCompensation
2023-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
NIKI on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
current ratio
0.78
current ratio reported
0.78
revenue growth
-66.71
revenue growth per share
-66.71
sbc pct revenue
293.29
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about NIKI's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
operating cash flow last tagged 2025-12-31, -731 days before the revenue period (2023-12-31); dropped rather than divided by current revenue
revenue is annual, not TTM
no operating income found in XBRL
revenue period ends 2023-12-31 (973 days ago) - the tag chain found nothing recent, so treat this row as unscored
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 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 not tagged; rebuilt from Revenues - CostOfRevenue
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 1 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, 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 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
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: interest cover
growth DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (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