Every figure this model derived for PSHG, 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
capex
254,566,000
PaymentsToAcquireOtherPropertyPlantAndEquipment
2025-12-31
cash
104,933,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
current assets
166,653,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-30
current liabilities
42,673,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-30
equity
343,379,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
interest expense
6,793,000
InterestExpense
2025-12-31
ocf
50,076,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
84,172,000
Revenues
2025-12-31
sbc
0
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
PSHG on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
79.61
current ratio
3.91
current ratio reported
3.91
deferred revenue growth
-100.0
dilution pct
-0.71
ebit yoy
24.21
fcf margin
-242.94
growth cv
2.07
interest cover
7.65
operating margin
61.7
owner earnings margin
-242.94
revenue growth
-3.74
revenue growth per share
-3.06
roic
17.21
rule of 40
57.96
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about PSHG'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
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 DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (contracted coverage, gross margin stability 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, durability -- 35% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left