Filing Flows › Companies › Alliance Laundry Holdings › Analysis traps
Alliance Laundry Holdings (ALH): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q2 2026, to Jun 30, 2026, filed Aug 13, 2026; rules v1.1
Alliance Laundry Holdings (ALH): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 30, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved. 2 to review; 3 with insufficient data; 2 not applicable. Each is a question to verify, with the normal explanation that would produce the same figures.
Check these first
FCF growth = the business improved Triggered · severity medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $56M (+55%), from $102M to $158M, but working capital released $36M more cash than the year before: 64% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $30M.
Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.
Adjusted profit = economic profit To review · confidence low
Adjusted EPS was 10% or more above GAAP in 2 of the last 3 quarters: read the reconciliation before taking the adjusted figure.
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 18.89 a share (price 22.60); 64% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving revenue growth (each year) by ±5 pts alone takes it from 15.75 to 22.62; across every method the research ran the range is 0 to 41. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
Innocent reading: A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Triggered severity medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $56M (+55%), from $102M to $158M, but working capital released $36M more cash than the year before: 64% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $30M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY2024 |
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $145M |
| Operating cash flow | $212M |
| Capex, year before | $43M |
| Capex | $54M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $102M |
| Free cash flow | $158M |
| Change in FCF | $56M |
| Change in capex | $10M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $36M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | $36M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +64.4% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 30124000.00 |
FCF = operating cash flow − cash capex; ΔFCF = ΔOCF − ΔCapEx; the working-capital part is the change in the cash-bridge items (receivables, inventory, payables, accruals), with the sign of the cash flow statement
Source: FY2025 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY2024 (cash flow statement, fiscal year before)
What would explain it innocently
- An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good
- Suppliers agreed longer payment terms in a contract
- Inventory was brought down after a glut and will stay down
What to look for in the filing
- Maintenance capex (what it costs to keep the assets working)
- Supplier payment terms and any supply-chain financing
- Management's capex guidance for next year
What would show the trap does not apply
- Next year's FCF holds or rises with capex back at its earlier level and working capital no longer releasing cash
- The 10-K's capex guidance and the segment capex show the cut is a completed programme, not deferral
- The working-capital release matches a disclosed change in terms or a divestiture, not stretched payables or a collection push
Look again: next filing.
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 1.1% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Stock compensation | $20M |
| Revenue | $1.7B |
| SBC / revenue | +1.1% |
| Buybacks | $6M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.3 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 174.3M shares |
| Diluted shares | 181.4M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | +4.1% |
SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section
Source: FY2025 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Insufficient data
fewer than five quarters with receivables and revenue on file (a year-over-year comparison needs five)
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit To review confidence low
Adjusted EPS was 10% or more above GAAP in 2 of the last 3 quarters: read the reconciliation before taking the adjusted figure.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter / adjusted EPS / GAAP EPS / gap | 2025-09-30 / 0.28 / 0.19 / 0.321; 2026-03-31 / 0.31 / 0.28 / 0.097; 2026-06-30 / 0.41 / 0.34 / 0.171 |
| Quarters with adjusted ≥ 10% above GAAP | 2 |
| Quarters compared | 3 |
| Latest gap | +17.1% |
the analysts' 'actual' (usually the company's adjusted EPS) against GAAP net income ÷ diluted shares for the matching quarter; a gap of 10% or more counts (the stand-in until three releases' reconciliation tables are on file)
Source: 2025-09-30 (adjusted 0.28 vs GAAP 0.19) · 2026-03-31 (adjusted 0.31 vs GAAP 0.28) · 2026-06-30 (adjusted 0.41 vs GAAP 0.34)
What would show the trap does not apply
- The reconciliation shows the excluded items ending (a restructuring with its final charge, a settlement paid) and the gap to GAAP closes in the next quarters
- The excluded items are only amortisation of acquired intangibles and the cash paid for the deals is in the investing cash flow
Look again: next filing.
C02 Low net debt = no refinancing risk Insufficient data
no debt figure could be read from the balance sheet (the filing may tag it in other lines)
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not triggered confidence high
EPS rose 90% and net income rose 121% in Q2 2026; the share count rose 16.4%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q2 2026 |
| Quarter before | Q2 2025 |
| EPS, year before | $0.18 |
| EPS | $0.34 |
| Net income, year before | $31M |
| Net income | $69M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 174.9M shares |
| Diluted shares | 203.6M shares |
| EPS growth | +90.4% |
| Net income growth | +121.3% |
| Diluted shares: change | +16.4% |
| eps from profit | $0.22 |
| eps from share count | -$0.06 |
EPS and net income against the same quarter a year earlier; the EPS bridge attributes the change to profit first, then to the share count (the order is fixed and disclosed)
Source: Q2 2026 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q2 2025 (the same quarter a year earlier)
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Insufficient data
3 fiscal years of net income on file; a cycle needs five
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 18.89 a share (price 22.60); 64% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving revenue growth (each year) by ±5 pts alone takes it from 15.75 to 22.62; across every method the research ran the range is 0 to 41. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 18.89 |
| price | 22.60 |
| terminal value share | +64.1% |
| swing by input | Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 15.75 / 22.62; Operating margin / ±3 pts / 16.15 / 21.64; WACC / ±1 pt / 17.05 / 21.22; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 17.75 / 20.04 |
| range all methods | 0.33; 40.75 |
the DCF's point value against the share of it that is the terminal value and the value at each input moved by one step (growth ±5 pts, WACC ±1 pt, margin ±3 pts …); the range across every method the research ran
Source: 2026-11-08 (valuation research)
What would explain it innocently
- A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary
- The inputs that matter most are themselves well known (a regulated return, a long contract)
What to look for in the filing
- Which input you believe differs from the research's and why
- What the price implies for growth (the reverse DCF on the fair-value page)
What would show the trap does not apply
- The DCF's value is robust to the terminal growth and discount rate (the range's low end is still above the price)
- The company's cash flows over the next three years track the DCF's early years
Look again: next filing.
J06 A bank's low P/E and high profit = safe Not applicable
not a bank
J08 A REIT's low net income = the dividend is unsafe Not applicable
not a REIT
What the statuses mean
Triggered: the filings show the pattern; read the normal explanations and the missing evidence before concluding anything. To review: one quarter or a weak signal; a reader's judgement, not a pattern. Not triggered: the pattern is absent on these figures. Insufficient data: the filings read so far do not hold what the rule needs; this is not a clean bill. Not applicable: the rule is not meant for this kind of company (a bank's working capital, a loss-making quarter's EPS growth). Out of date: the latest filing is more than fifteen months old.
Severity is what the pattern could mean for cash, value or solvency; confidence is how reliable the inputs and the reading are. The two are kept apart.
Record a view
A reader's judgement, grounds, what would change it and the next review; kept in the browser (needs JavaScript).
Every rule and the companies it triggers on → Alliance Laundry Holdings: cash flow →
Each rule reads the company's own filings by a fixed formula and says what would explain the same figures innocently. A triggered rule is a question to verify, not a finding of manipulation, and not a view on the stock. Missing data is shown as missing, never as clear. Not investment advice.