Every figure this model derived for OR, 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
current assets
147,684,000
CurrentAssets
2025-12-31
current liabilities
32,632,000
CurrentLiabilities
2025-12-31
equity
1,432,041,000
Equity
2025-12-31
interest expense
4,475,000
FinanceCosts
2025-12-31
ocf
245,596,000
CashFlowsFromUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
277,370,000
Revenue
2025-12-31
sbc
8,388,000
AdjustmentsForSharebasedPayments
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
OR on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
87.3
current ratio
4.53
current ratio reported
4.53
ebit cagr
74.64
ebit yoy
151.22
ev ebit
36.78
ev owner earnings
30.51
ev sales
26.09
fcf margin
88.54
interest cover
43.97
net debt ebitda
0.02
operating margin
70.94
owner earnings margin
85.52
revenue growth
45.1
revenue growth per share
45.1
roic
10.82
rule of 40
116.04
sbc pct revenue
3.02
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about OR'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 capital expenditure tagged; treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
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`
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