Every figure this model derived for SERV, 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 2026-06-30.
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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
SERV on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-1897.73
current ratio
14.3
current ratio reported
12.83
deferred revenue growth
19650.0
dilution pct
69.96
ev owner earnings
-0.92
ev sales
24.1
fcf margin
-2179.51
growth cv
1.09
operating margin
-2476.77
revenue growth
426.42
revenue growth per share
209.72
roic
-130.98
rule of 40
-2050.35
sbc pct revenue
449.4
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about SERV's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: owner earnings margin, net margin -- owner earnings margin came out at -2,629% against a scale that tops out near 1,750%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 7,791,000 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
there is no operating profit to value; valuation rests on EV/revenue (24.1x) instead
no debt and no profit, so interest cover cannot be measured; scored on cash runway instead: 235M of net cash against a 170M annual burn is 1.4 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`
quality rests on 4 of 5 inputs; not tagged: owner earnings
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth