Every figure this model derived for NPK, 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 2026-07-05.
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
7,034,000
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2026-07-05
cash
16,291,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-07-05
current assets
401,540,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-07-05
current liabilities
76,929,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-07-05
equity
411,271,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-07-05
interest expense
801,000
InterestPaidNet
2026-07-05
ocf
33,465,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-07-05
revenue
544,681,000
Revenues
2026-07-05
sbc
575,000
AllocatedShareBasedCompensationExpense
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
NPK on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
10.49
current ratio
5.93
current ratio reported
5.22
deferred revenue growth
25.66
dilution pct
0.27
ebit cagr
27.93
fcf margin
4.85
growth cv
1.61
interest cover
65.57
operating margin
9.64
owner earnings margin
4.75
roic
10.5
sbc pct revenue
0.11
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about NPK's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
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
growth DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (revenue growth, margin recent 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, growth -- 45% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left