Every figure this model derived for SNI.OL, 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 2024-11-30.
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
SNI.OL on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
18.63
current ratio
1.06
current ratio reported
1.06
ebit cagr
32.08
ebit yoy
28.33
fcf margin
6.3
growth cv
1.13
net debt ebitda
2.44
operating margin
18.63
owner earnings margin
6.3
revenue growth
2.5
revenue growth per share
2.5
roic
12.28
rule of 40
21.13
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about SNI.OL's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
newest fact in the filing is 2024-12-01 (1y old); this company's data is not usable and the scores below should be ignored
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
revenue period ends 2024-11-30 (636 days ago) - the tag chain found nothing recent, so treat this row as unscored
no current stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
reports in USD and quotes in NOK, so the share price is converted at 1 NOK = 0.1074 USD as at 2026-08-28. Only the price is converted: every figure from the filing is as reported, and only the multiples built on market capitalisation carry the rate — but no share count is available, so there is still no market capitalisation
no usable diluted share count, so growth is measured on total revenue rather than per share; a company issuing shares to fund that growth reads better than it is
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
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: interest cover
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: sustained growth
no interest expense tagged while 1,647M of debt is on the balance sheet, so interest cover is unmeasured rather than perfect