Every figure this model derived for RBC, 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 2026-06-27.
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
0
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2023-04-01
cash
244,820,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-27
current assets
1,266,900,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-06-27
current liabilities
500,700,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-06-27
equity
3,462,000,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-27
interest expense
27,500,000
InterestExpense
2026-06-27
ocf
467,500,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-06-27
revenue
1,954,400,000
Revenues
2026-06-27
sbc
34,600,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-06-27
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
RBC on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
32.12
current ratio
2.85
current ratio reported
2.53
deferred revenue growth
55.07
dilution pct
4.23
ebit cagr
15.0
fcf margin
23.92
growth cv
0.85
interest cover
16.75
net debt ebitda
1.19
operating margin
23.57
owner earnings margin
22.15
roic
8.74
rpo growth
110.59
sbc pct revenue
1.77
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about RBC's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2023-04-01); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
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
growth DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 4 inputs could be computed (revenue growth, margin recent 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, growth -- 45% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left