Every figure this model derived for STM, 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.
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
STM on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
18.83
current ratio
3.36
current ratio reported
3.36
dilution pct
-1.74
ebit cagr
-48.14
ebit yoy
-89.56
ev ebit
253.38
ev owner earnings
22.63
ev sales
3.76
fcf margin
18.24
growth cv
4.05
interest cover
3.18
operating margin
1.48
owner earnings margin
16.6
revenue growth
-11.07
revenue growth per share
-9.5
roic
0.84
rule of 40
-9.59
sbc pct revenue
1.64
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about STM's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2010-12-31); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
operating margin is only 1.48%, so EV/EBIT (253x) measures the rounding error in the denominator; valuation rests on EV/revenue (3.8x) instead
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`
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: contracted coverage