Every figure this model derived for PDYN, 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 2026-06-30.
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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
PDYN on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-300.97
current ratio
7.39
current ratio reported
6.3
dilution pct
57.38
fcf margin
-309.96
growth cv
5.57
operating margin
-360.67
owner earnings margin
-358.06
revenue growth
171.79
revenue growth per share
72.7
roic
-120.4
rpo growth
1347.06
rule of 40
-188.88
sbc pct revenue
48.1
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about PDYN's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
gross profit not tagged; rebuilt from RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTax - CostOfRevenue
no debt and no profit, so interest cover cannot be measured; scored on cash runway instead: 43M of net cash against a 37M annual burn is 1.2 years
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
no interest expense tagged while 1M of debt is on the balance sheet, so interest cover is unmeasured rather than perfect