RIO TINTO PLC (RIO)

Every figure this model derived for RIO, 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	12,335,000,000	`PurchaseOfPropertyPlantAndEquipmentIntangibleAssetsOtherThanGoodwillInvestmentPropertyAndOtherNoncurrentAssets`	2025-12-31
cash	9,446,000,000	`CashAndCashEquivalents`	2025-12-31
current assets	21,569,000,000	`CurrentAssets`	2025-12-31
current liabilities	14,930,000,000	`CurrentLiabilities`	2025-12-31
equity	62,203,000,000	`EquityAttributableToOwnersOfParent`	2025-12-31
interest expense	1,062,000,000	`FinanceCosts`	2025-12-31
ocf	16,832,000,000	`CashFlowsFromUsedInOperatingActivities`	2025-12-31
revenue	57,638,000,000	`Revenue`	2025-12-31
sbc	237,000,000	`ExpenseFromSharebasedPaymentTransactionsInWhichGoodsOrServicesReceivedDidNotQualifyForRecognitionAsAssets`	2025-12-31

The ratios

The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up RIO on one particular measure came for.

Ratio	Value
cash operating margin	27.36
current ratio	1.44
current ratio reported	1.44
dilution pct	0.28
ebit cagr	-15.87
ebit yoy	-4.58
fcf margin	7.8
growth cv	2.79
interest cover	14.06
net debt ebitda	0.95
operating margin	25.91
owner earnings margin	7.39
revenue growth	7.42
revenue growth per share	7.12
roic	15.32
rule of 40	33.33
sbc pct revenue	0.41

What to be careful about

What this model itself distrusts about RIO'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
share count is from 2025-12-31 (242 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.
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