Filing Flows › Companies › Aurinia Pharmaceuticals › Analysis traps
Aurinia Pharmaceuticals (AUPH): 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 Oct 30, 2026; rules v1.1
Aurinia Pharmaceuticals (AUPH): 0 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 2026. 1 to review; 4 with insufficient data; 3 not applicable. Each is a question to verify, with the normal explanation that would produce the same figures.
Check these first
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 39.58 a share (price 16.46); 79% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving wacc by ±1 pt alone takes it from 32.99 to 49.64; across every method the research ran the range is -7 to 429. 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 Insufficient data
fewer than two fiscal years with operating cash flow and capital expenditure on file
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 5.2% of revenue, but buybacks of $98M covered it (6.7×) and the diluted share count fell 5.1%: the dilution has been paid for in cash.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Stock compensation | $15M |
| Revenue | $283M |
| SBC / revenue | +5.2% |
| Buybacks | $98M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 6.7 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 146.2M shares |
| Diluted shares | 138.7M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -5.1% |
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 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 rose 1% and net income rose 0% in Q3 2026; the share count fell 0.6%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 2026 |
| Quarter before | Q3 2025 |
| EPS, year before | $0.23 |
| EPS | $0.23 |
| Net income, year before | $32M |
| Net income | $32M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 136.0M shares |
| Diluted shares | 135.2M shares |
| EPS growth | +1.3% |
| Net income growth | +0.5% |
| Diluted shares: change | -0.6% |
| eps from profit | $0.00 |
| 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 applicable
a loss on a trailing or mid-cycle basis: the P/E has no meaning
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 39.58 a share (price 16.46); 79% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving wacc by ±1 pt alone takes it from 32.99 to 49.64; across every method the research ran the range is -7 to 429. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 39.58 |
| price | 16.46 |
| terminal value share | +78.9% |
| swing by input | WACC / ±1 pt / 32.99 / 49.64; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 32.52 / 47.92; Terminal growth / ±0.5 pt / 37.08 / 42.66; Operating margin / ±3 pts / 37.26 / 41.89 |
| range all methods | -7.2; 428.98 |
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 → Aurinia Pharmaceuticals: cash flow → Earnings quality score →
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.