Every figure this model derived for XHG, 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 2025-09-30.
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.
Figure
Value
XBRL tag
As at
capex
0
PaymentsToAcquirePropertyPlantAndEquipment
2020-09-30
cash
979,000
CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue
2026-03-31
current assets
5,173,000
AssetsCurrent
2026-03-31
current liabilities
135,725,000
LiabilitiesCurrent
2026-03-31
equity
-126,322,000
StockholdersEquity
2026-03-31
interest expense
3,867,000
InterestExpenseNonoperating
2025-09-30
ocf
-1,643,000
NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities
2025-09-30
revenue
51,309,000
Revenues
2025-09-30
sbc
357,000
ShareBasedCompensation
2024-09-30
The ratios
The figures themselves rather than their scores — what somebody looking up
XHG on one particular measure came for.
Ratio
Value
cash operating margin
-196.5
current ratio
0.04
current ratio reported
0.04
deferred revenue growth
-49.8
dilution pct
21070.87
fcf margin
-3.2
interest cover
-26.17
operating margin
-197.21
owner earnings margin
-3.9
revenue growth
24.86
revenue growth per share
-99.41
rule of 40
-172.35
sbc pct revenue
0.7
What to be careful about
What this model itself distrusts about XHG's figures. Written by the
derivation as it ran, not added afterwards.
revenue is annual, not TTM
operating income is annual, not TTM
no current capital expenditure tagged (last tagged 2020-09-30); treated as zero, so free cash flow is overstated and equals operating cash flow
no market cap; set `market_cap` in overrides.yaml
share count is from 2026-03-31 (153 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 rests on 4 of 5 inputs; not tagged: roic
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
2 of 5 dimensions could not be measured (valuation, durability -- 35% of the model), so this row is not comparable with the others; its total rests on what was left