Every figure this model derived for USDW, 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 2026-02-28.
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
0
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-05-31
current assets
0
AssetsCurrent
2026-05-31
current liabilities
622
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-05-31
equity
90,196
StockholdersEquity
2026-05-31
interest expense
0
InterestPaidNet
2026-05-31
ocf
-55,504
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-05-31
revenue
37,036
Revenues
2026-02-28
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
USDW on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
dilution pct
168.48
fcf margin
-149.86
owner earnings margin
-149.86
revenue growth
-1.92
revenue growth per share
-63.47
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about USDW's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
operating income last tagged 2024-11-30, 455 days before the revenue period (2026-02-28); dropped rather than divided by current revenue
presents no operating result, and rebuilding it from the statement missed the reported pre-tax profit by 379.95% of revenue, so it is refused rather than used
revenue is annual, not TTM
no current stock compensation tagged; treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
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
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 DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, cash operating margin not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
valuation DROPPED from the total: only 0 of 2 inputs could be computed (ev ebit, 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 (worst year, contracted coverage not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
resilience rests on 2 of 3 inputs; not tagged: liquidity
growth DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 4 inputs could be computed (sustained growth, margin trend, margin recent not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
4 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation, durability, growth -- 85% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left