Every figure this model derived for TOP, 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 2026-03-31.
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
899,500
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2026-03-31
cash
10,407,367
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-06-30
equity
36,697,571
StockholdersEquity
2026-06-30
ocf
14,021,796
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-03-31
revenue
4,723,765
Revenues
2026-03-31
sbc
60,194
ShareBasedCompensation
2026-03-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
TOP on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-22.9
dilution pct
0.12
fcf margin
277.79
operating margin
-24.92
owner earnings margin
276.52
revenue growth
41.89
revenue growth per share
41.72
roic
-3.54
rule of 40
16.96
sbc pct revenue
1.27
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about TOP'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 2025-03-31 (517 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
resilience DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 3 inputs could be computed (interest cover, liquidity not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
3 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability, resilience -- 50% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left