Every figure this model derived for RSCF, 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 2024-09-30.
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.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
cash
1,030,408
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2024-09-30
current assets
2,093,348
AssetsCurrent
2024-09-30
current liabilities
139,252
LiabilitiesCurrent
2024-09-30
equity
2,079,520
StockholdersEquity
2024-09-30
ocf
-309,038
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2024-09-30
revenue
1,721,618
Revenues
2024-09-30
sbc
55,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2023-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
RSCF on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-0.43
current ratio
15.03
current ratio reported
15.03
deferred revenue growth
-21.64
dilution pct
-0.26
fcf margin
-17.95
growth cv
59.31
operating margin
-3.63
owner earnings margin
-21.15
revenue growth
25.64
revenue growth per share
25.97
roic
-4.7
rule of 40
22.01
sbc pct revenue
3.19
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about RSCF's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
newest fact in the filing is 2024-09-30 (1y old); this company's data is not usable and the scores below should be ignored
revenue period ends 2024-09-30 (699 days ago) - the tag chain found nothing recent, so treat this row as unscored
no current capital expenditure tagged; treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2024-09-30 (699 days old, weighted average diluted); a stock split since then would make the market cap wrong. Set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml to be sure.
no debt and no profit, so interest cover cannot be measured; scored on cash runway instead: 1M of net cash against a 0M annual burn is 3.3 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
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: contracted coverage