Every figure this model derived for PRSI, 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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
PRSI on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
19.33
dilution pct
0.0
ebit cagr
80.67
ebit yoy
138.7
fcf margin
3.39
growth cv
3.14
interest cover
1.9
operating margin
12.68
owner earnings margin
3.39
revenue growth
23.15
revenue growth per share
23.15
rule of 40
35.83
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about PRSI's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-05-11 (111 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.
invested capital is -134M (cash exceeds equity plus debt), so return on capital is unbounded rather than undefined; scored as maximal
gross profit not tagged; rebuilt from RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTax - CostOfGoodsAndServicesSold
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
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: contracted coverage
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: liquidity