Filing Flows › Companies › Boot Barn Holdings › Analysis traps
Boot Barn Holdings (BOOT): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q2 FY27, to Sep 26, 2026, filed Oct 28, 2026; rules v1.1
Boot Barn Holdings (BOOT): 0 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 26, 2026. 2 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
Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued To review · confidence medium
Net income of $253M is at a high against a median of $171M over eight years; at 15.8× the market is not pricing it as cheap, but a multiple on this year's profit still understates the mid-cycle one (23.4×).
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 123.23 a share (price 130.96); 79% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 92.85 to 153.60; across every method the research ran the range is 19 to 308. 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 Not triggered confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $127M to $126M; working capital and lower capex explain 43% of it, so most of the gain is in operating cash flow itself.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY25 |
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $148M |
| Operating cash flow | $305M |
| Capex, year before | $148M |
| Capex | $179M |
| Free cash flow, year before | −$753K |
| Free cash flow | $126M |
| Change in FCF | $127M |
| Change in capex | $30M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $55M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | $55M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +43.2% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 102395000.00 |
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: FY26 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY25 (cash flow statement, fiscal year before)
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 year | FY26 |
| Stock compensation | $16M |
| Revenue | $2.3B |
| SBC / revenue | +0.7% |
| Buybacks | $50M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 3.1 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 30.8M shares |
| Diluted shares | 30.7M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -0.1% |
SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section
Source: FY26 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew 15% against revenue 15% in Q2 FY27; DSO 3 against a median of 2: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q2 FY27 |
| Revenue, year over year | +15.1% |
| Receivables, year over year | +15.4% |
| Quarter before | Q1 FY27 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +17.8% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +244.5% |
| Days sales outstanding | 3.2 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 1.7 |
| Receivables | $12M |
| Revenue | $582M |
receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before
Source: Q2 FY27 (receivables and revenue) · Q2 FY26 (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 rose 26% and net income rose 24% in Q2 FY27; the share count fell 1.1%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q2 FY27 |
| Quarter before | Q2 FY26 |
| EPS, year before | $1.37 |
| EPS | $1.73 |
| Net income, year before | $42M |
| Net income | $52M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 30.8M shares |
| Diluted shares | 30.4M shares |
| EPS growth | +25.7% |
| Net income growth | +24.3% |
| Diluted shares: change | -1.1% |
| eps from profit | $0.33 |
| eps from share count | $0.02 |
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 FY27 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q2 FY26 (the same quarter a year earlier)
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued To review confidence medium
Net income of $253M is at a high against a median of $171M over eight years; at 15.8× the market is not pricing it as cheap, but a multiple on this year's profit still understates the mid-cycle one (23.4×).
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $4.0B |
| net income ttm | $253M |
| pe ttm | 15.80 |
| net income median fy | $171M |
| pe mid cycle | 23.40 |
| net income peak fy | $226M |
| years | FY19 / 39.0; FY20 / 48.0; FY21 / 59.0; FY22 / 192.0; FY23 / 171.0; FY24 / 147.0; FY25 / 181.0; FY26 / 226.0 |
| down years in window | 2 |
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: Q2 FY27 (net income, trailing twelve months)
What would show the trap does not apply
- Profit holds at this level through the next two years (the eight-year peak was a new base, not a top)
- The industry's capacity and prices stay where they are rather than reverting
Look again: next filing.
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 123.23 a share (price 130.96); 79% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 92.85 to 153.60; across every method the research ran the range is 19 to 308. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 123.23 |
| price | 130.96 |
| terminal value share | +79.3% |
| swing by input | Operating margin / ±3 pts / 92.85 / 153.6; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 101.83 / 148.64; WACC / ±1 pt / 108.17 / 142.71; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 113.99 / 132.47 |
| range all methods | 18.8; 307.8 |
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 → Boot Barn Holdings: 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.