Every figure this model derived for ONEG, 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 2026-03-31.
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
490,000
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2026-03-31
cash
1,694,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-03-31
current assets
36,275,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-03-31
current liabilities
14,307,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-03-31
equity
283,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-03-31
interest expense
298,000
InterestExpenseDebt
2026-03-31
ocf
1,782,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-03-31
revenue
49,358,000
Revenues
2026-03-31
sbc
1,487,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-03-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
ONEG on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-22.46
current ratio
2.59
current ratio reported
2.54
deferred revenue growth
-55.08
dilution pct
34.55
fcf margin
2.62
interest cover
-42.39
operating margin
-25.59
owner earnings margin
-0.4
revenue growth
-7.23
revenue growth per share
-31.05
rpo growth
-58.34
rule of 40
-32.83
sbc pct revenue
3.01
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about ONEG's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-03-31 (152 days old, dei cover page); 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`
quality rests on 4 of 5 inputs; not tagged: roic
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 rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth