Filing Flows › Companies › ABM Industries › Earnings quality
ABM Industries earnings quality score
How much of the reported profit is backed by cash, and how many markers of managed earnings the filings show
Score33 / 100 · grade E · rank 1002 of 1027
ABM Industries (ABM) scores 33 of 100 for earnings quality, grade E: rank 1002 of 1027 companies and 273 of 287 in industrials. It loses the most points on accruals of -1.4% of assets, higher than 77% of companies, Montier C-score 3 of 4 checks failed, adjusted earnings 27% below GAAP.
What earned and lost points
| Component | What the filings show | Points | Of |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accruals | accruals of -1.4% of assets, higher than 77% of companies | 6 | 29 |
| Montier C-score | Montier C-score 3 of 4 checks failed | 5 | 21 |
| Discretionary accruals | discretionary accruals of +3.6% of assets (modified Jones), larger than most | 6 | 14 |
| Piotroski F-score | Piotroski F-score 7 of 9 | 11 | 14 |
| Non-GAAP gap | adjusted earnings 27% below GAAP | 1 | 14 |
| Earnings smoothness | profit steadier than cash flow (smoothness 0.37) | 2 | 7 |
How the score is built
Eight published measures, each scored against the whole universe or on its own scale and weighted: accruals 20, discretionary accruals 10, Beneish M 15, Dechow F 15, Montier C 15, Piotroski F 10, the non-GAAP gap 10, smoothness 5. A measure that cannot be computed (Beneish for a bank, say) drops out and the rest is rescaled, so every company is scored on what applies to it.
Every company ranked → The full quality workbench, live → ABM Industries: cash flow →
Computed from the companies’ own XBRL filings (latest fiscal year) by published formulas; a statistical screen, not an audit or an accusation. A low score means the reported profit shows more of the markers of managed or low-quality earnings than its peers. Not investment advice.