Every figure this model derived for WYGC, 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
28,849
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2024-12-31
cash
151
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-03-31
current assets
27,285
AssetsCurrent
2026-03-31
current liabilities
132,003
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-03-31
equity
-76,066
StockholdersEquity
2026-03-31
interest expense
26
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2024-12-31
ocf
-159,172
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2026-03-31
revenue
24,627
Revenues
2025-12-31
sbc
350,694
ShareBasedCompensation
2025-12-31
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
WYGC on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-1019.73
current ratio
0.21
current ratio reported
0.21
dilution pct
1.22
fcf margin
-763.48
interest cover
-23711.5
revenue growth
-59.15
revenue growth per share
-59.64
rule of 40
-2562.49
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about WYGC's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
WITHHELD: operating margin, sbc pct revenue, owner earnings margin, net margin -- net margin came out at -2,504% against a scale that tops out near 1,500%, which is arithmetic on a revenue figure of 24,627 rather than a margin. The figure is absent rather than corrected: there is no right value to put here.
revenue is annual, not TTM
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-05-19 (103 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`
quality DROPPED from the total: only 1 of 5 inputs could be computed (operating margin, roic, sbc discipline, owner earnings 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
durability rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: contracted coverage
growth rests on 3 of 4 inputs; not tagged: margin trend
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