Every figure this model derived for VSA, 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.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
capex
10,905,000
PaymentsToAcquireProductiveAssets
2025-12-31
cash
7,863,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2025-12-31
current assets
7,884,000
AssetsCurrent
2025-12-31
current liabilities
546,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2025-12-31
equity
14,692,000
StockholdersEquity
2025-12-31
interest expense
65,000
InterestPaidNet
2024-12-31
ocf
-26,898,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-12-31
revenue
149,000
Revenues
2025-12-31
sbc
183,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2024-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
VSA on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
current ratio
14.44
current ratio reported
14.44
deferred revenue growth
31.44
dilution pct
287.8
interest cover
-87.95
roic
-66.14
sbc pct revenue
122.82
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about VSA's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: operating margin, cash operating margin, owner earnings margin, fcf margin, net margin, capex intensity, ocf margin, ebitda margin -- net margin came out at 164,964% against a scale that tops out near 1,500%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 149,000 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2025-12-31 (242 days old, weighted average diluted); 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`
quality DROPPED from the total: only 2 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, owner earnings, 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 sales, ev owner earnings not tagged), so the score is not meaningful. Its weight is spread over the other dimensions
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: revenue growth
2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (quality, valuation -- 55% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left