Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › Arhaus › Analysis traps

Arhaus (ARHS): analysis traps

Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 2026, to Sep 30, 2026, filed Nov 5, 2026; rules v1.1

Arhaus (ARHS): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved. 1 to review; 2 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 high · confidence medium

Free cash flow rose $19M (+48%), from $40M to $59M, but working capital released $20M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $30M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $30M.

Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.

A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high

The DCF's point value is 6.72 a share (price 14.19); 77% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 4.12 to 9.32; across every method the research ran the range is -3 to 65. 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 high · confidence medium

Free cash flow rose $19M (+48%), from $40M to $59M, but working capital released $20M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $30M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $30M.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal year beforeFY2024
Fiscal yearFY2025
Operating cash flow, year before$147M
Operating cash flow$137M
Capex, year before$107M
Capex$78M
Free cash flow, year before$40M
Free cash flow$59M
Change in FCF$19M
Change in capex−$30M
Working capital: change in its cash contribution$20M
Of which: capex cut$30M
Of which: working capital released$20M
Share of the increase that need not repeat+257.3%
Operating cash flow before working capital: change-30258000.00

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

What to look for in the filing

What would show the trap does not apply

Look again: next filing.

A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high

Stock compensation is 0.7% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal yearFY2025
Stock compensation$9M
Revenue$1.4B
SBC / revenue+0.7%
Buybacks0
Buybacks / SBC0.0
Diluted shares, year before140.7M shares
Diluted shares141.4M shares
Diluted shares: change+0.5%

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 Not triggered confidence medium

Receivables grew -70% against revenue 7% in Q3 2026; DSO 0 against a median of 0: collections are keeping pace with sales.

The figures and how they are read
QuarterQ3 2026
Revenue, year over year+6.8%
Receivables, year over year-70.1%
Quarter beforeQ2 2026
Revenue y/y, quarter before+7.4%
Receivables y/y, quarter before-75.7%
Days sales outstanding0.1
DSO, median of eight quarters0.3
Receivables$320K
Revenue$368M

receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before

Source: Q3 2026 (receivables and revenue) · Q3 2025 (the same quarter a year earlier)

B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit Insufficient data

no reconciliation table read from the releases yet and fewer than three quarters with both an adjusted and a GAAP EPS

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 fell 36% and net income fell 36% in Q3 2026; the share count rose 0.4%: EPS growth follows profit growth.

The figures and how they are read
QuarterQ3 2026
Quarter beforeQ3 2025
EPS, year before$0.09
EPS$0.06
Net income, year before$12M
Net income$8M
Diluted shares, year before141.7M shares
Diluted shares142.3M shares
EPS growth-36.0%
Net income growth-36.0%
Diluted shares: change+0.4%
eps from profit-$0.03
eps from share count$0.00

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: Q3 2026 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q3 2025 (the same quarter a year earlier)

E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not triggered confidence medium

Net income of $65M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $67M, best $137M): the P/E of 31.2× is on a normal year.

The figures and how they are read
market value$2.0B
net income ttm$65M
pe ttm31.20
net income median fy$67M
pe mid cycle30.00
net income peak fy$137M
yearsFY2019 / 8.0; FY2020 / 6.0; FY2021 / 21.0; FY2022 / 137.0; FY2023 / 125.0; FY2024 / 69.0; FY2025 / 67.0
down years in window4

P/E on the trailing twelve months' net income against the P/E on the median net income of the last eight fiscal years (a mid-cycle stand-in); 'at a peak' = this year's profit at or above 90% of the best year and at least 1.3× the median

Source: Q3 2026 (net income, trailing twelve months)

E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high

The DCF's point value is 6.72 a share (price 14.19); 77% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 4.12 to 9.32; across every method the research ran the range is -3 to 65. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.

The figures and how they are read
dcf value6.72
price14.19
terminal value share+76.6%
swing by inputOperating margin / ±3 pts / 4.12 / 9.32; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 6.0 / 7.58; WACC / ±1 pt / 6.2 / 7.38; Capex (share of revenue) / ±1 pt / 6.3 / 7.14
range all methods-2.91; 64.68

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

What to look for in the filing

What would show the trap does not apply

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 → Arhaus: 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.