| Market Cap | €109.5M | |
| Enterprise Value | — | |
| Revenue | €121.0M | — |
| Gross Profit | — | — |
| EBITDA | €14.0M | — |
| Net Income | €8.0M | — |
| Diluted EPS | €0.74 | — |
| Free Cash Flow | -€3.9M | — |
Every bar is a figure as filed. The blue bars are the reported subtotals (Revenue → Operating income → Pretax income → Net income), drawn from zero at exactly the number in the filing — never a sum computed here. The coloured steps between them are the filed component lines, applied as decreases (the taxonomy stores expenses as positive magnitudes) or, for “Other non-operating”, exactly as signed in the filing.
Residuals. Whatever part of a reported subtotal-to-subtotal gap the served lines do not name is drawn as its own hatched step and labelled a residual. Stretching a neighbouring step to make the arithmetic close — what a conventional waterfall does — would put a number on screen that nobody filed.
Skipped rungs. This filer does not tag gross profit for this period (banks, insurers and REITs routinely skip gross profit and operating income), so the bridge jumps straight between the subtotals that exist and the unnamed part of that jump is the residual above.
Operating expenses. No R&D / SG&A / selling detail line is served for this period, so the filed operating-expense TOTAL stands in as one step.
Reconciliation.
| Step | Applied | Running level | % of revenue | prior |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue · reported | €121.0M | €121.0M | 100.0% | — |
| Operating expenses (total) | -€107.0M | €14.0M | −88.4% | — |
| Other (residual) · residual | -€3.0M | €11.0M | −2.5% | — |
| Operating income · reported | €11.0M | €11.0M | 9.1% | — |
| Other (residual) · residual | €377,270 | €11.4M | 0.3% | — |
| Pretax income · reported | €11.4M | €11.4M | 9.4% | — |
| Income tax | -€3.4M | €8.0M | −2.8% | — |
| Minority interest | -€5,305 | €8.0M | −0.0% | — |
| Other (residual) · residual | €10,611 | €8.0M | 0.0% | — |
| Net income · reported | €8.0M | €8.0M | 6.6% | — |
Every figure is a filed cash-flow line, summed over the fiscal years listed below. The taxonomy stores payments as positive magnitudes, so each use is applied here as a decrease. Nothing is annualised, inflation-adjusted or imputed.
The window. Operating cash flow is the anchor, so the bridge covers exactly the 1 fiscal year that serve it (2025). A year the store has no operating cash flow for is outside the window entirely — its capex and buybacks are not summed either.
Debt is netted. Long-term debt issued less repaid is shown as one net step, because a refinancing that issues and repays the same amount is not two events of capital allocation. Short-term / commercial-paper movement is a different tag and is not included — it lands in the remainder.
The remainder is not free cash flow. It is what the named lines do not account for: net purchases and sales of investment securities (the largest piece for a cash-rich filer), short-term-debt movement, other financing and investing items, FX, and the change in the cash balance itself. Calling it “cash retained” would assert a reconciliation this bridge has not done.
The hatch inside operating cash flow. €282,191 of the pool is the stock-based-compensation add-back (4% of it, filed in 1 of 1 years) — a real cost of employing people, settled in shares rather than cash, which is why it sits inside operating cash flow. The dilution it causes shows up in the share count, not here.
| Fiscal year | Operating Cash Flow | Capex | Acquisitions | Dividends | Buybacks | Debt issued | Debt repaid |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | €6.8M | €10.7M | €2.6M | €4.1M | €349,526 | €5.0M | €1.7M |
A blank cell means the filer did not tag that line for that year — never a zero.
| DPS (FY2025) | — |
| Trailing yield | — |
| Payout ratio | 51.0% |
| Growth streak | — |
| 5y DPS growth | — |
| Fiscal year | DPS | YoY | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| FY20252025-12-31 | — | — | reported |
None of the three composites is computable for this filer — each needs two consecutive fiscal years of specific lines (COGS, PP&E, receivables), which many financials and asset-light names legitimately never tag. The trend below is what the store does serve.
| Quality trend | 2025 | Δ vs 2024 | Trend · 2y | vs own | vs sector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Margin | 9.1% | — | — | p50 | p66 |
| Net Margin | 6.6% | — | — | p50 | p67 |
| Return on Equity | 8.8% | — | — | p50 | p57 |
No composite. The three scores are not averaged into one “quality” number. They point in different directions (F is a 0–9 count, higher-better; Z is a distress distance, higher-safer; M is a manipulation screen, lower-cleaner) and were fitted on different samples for different questions — a blended figure would be ours, not theirs, and would hide exactly the disagreement that is worth reading.
Sector context. The percentile columns on the trend rows are the ones this payload serves: “vs own” ranks the latest value inside this company’s own served history, “vs sector” inside its sector pool. A blank sector cell means the pool was too thin to rank honestly (or the metric is a currency level, where a cross-currency rank would be meaningless) — never a filled-in guess. The three SCORES carry no sector percentile: the payload’s percentile block covers the served ratios only, so “is this Z good for Consumer Staples?” is a question we cannot answer from what is served, and we don’t pretend to.
No score history. A 12-year F-Score / Z-Score strip is not drawn. The point-in-time factor store carries valuation, returns, margin, momentum and growth factors — not these composites — and recomputing them here from the annual columns would produce a series that disagrees with the headline above (different vintage of facts, different restatement handling). A score that disagrees with itself is a wrong number, so the history is omitted rather than approximated.
The nine named F-Score checks, the Merton distance-to-default / default probability, ROIIC and the growth-durability CAGRs live on FS · Financial Strength; the full ratio grid — every served ratio, with its own trend and both percentiles — is the Ratios section below.
The sector classification is SIC-derived, not official GICS. Statement lines are XBRL facts as filed with the company's home regulator (SEC EDGAR for US filers; ESEF/EDINET and other national regulators for foreign filers); ratios and other derived figures are computed from them. A blank cell means the tag was absent — never imputed.