Every figure this model derived for WW, 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 2026-06-30.
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
WW on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
11.68
current ratio
1.82
current ratio reported
1.38
deferred revenue growth
-15.82
ev owner earnings
-33.63
ev sales
0.77
fcf margin
-2.29
interest cover
-0.51
net debt ebitda
4.49
operating margin
-3.89
owner earnings margin
-2.29
revenue growth
-9.12
revenue growth per share
-9.12
roic
-3.25
rule of 40
-13.0
sbc pct revenue
0.0
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about WW's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
no current stock compensation tagged (last tagged 2024-12-28); treated as zero, so owner earnings are overstated
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2024-12-28); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
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
there is no operating profit to value; valuation rests on EV/revenue (0.8x) 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`