Filing Flows › Companies › Calix › Analysis traps
Calix (CALX): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 2026, to Sep 26, 2026, filed Nov 3, 2026; rules v1.1
Calix (CALX): 2 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 26, 2026: receivables growing = future cash is certain; stock compensation added back = no economic cost. 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
Receivables growing = future cash is certain Triggered · severity high · confidence medium
Receivables grew 46% year over year in Q3 2026 against revenue growth of 14%, and the quarter before 116% against 21%; days sales outstanding is 40 against a median of 33 over the eight quarters before. More of each quarter's revenue is still owed by customers.
Innocent reading: Seasonality: a quarter that always ends with big shipments.
Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Triggered · severity medium · confidence high
Stock compensation was $88M, 8.8% of revenue, in FY2025; buybacks were $94M (1.1× the SBC) and the diluted share count still rose 5.2%. 'Adjusted' figures that add SBC back treat pay in shares as free; the cost is borne by every shareholder as dilution, or by the cash spent to buy the shares back.
Innocent reading: A young company paying in equity while it scales; intensity falls as revenue grows.
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 14.65 a share (price 37.24); 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 7.00 to 22.30; across every method the research ran the range is -140 to 149. 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 $65M to $116M; working capital and lower capex explain 0% of it, so most of the gain is in operating cash flow itself.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY2024 |
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $68M |
| Operating cash flow | $135M |
| Capex, year before | $18M |
| Capex | $19M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $50M |
| Free cash flow | $116M |
| Change in FCF | $65M |
| Change in capex | $1M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | −$49M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | 0.00 |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +0.0% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 115171000.00 |
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)
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Triggered severity medium · confidence high
Stock compensation was $88M, 8.8% of revenue, in FY2025; buybacks were $94M (1.1× the SBC) and the diluted share count still rose 5.2%. 'Adjusted' figures that add SBC back treat pay in shares as free; the cost is borne by every shareholder as dilution, or by the cash spent to buy the shares back.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Stock compensation | $88M |
| Revenue | $1.0B |
| SBC / revenue | +8.8% |
| Buybacks | $94M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 1.1 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 65.9M shares |
| Diluted shares | 69.3M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | +5.2% |
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)
What would explain it innocently
- A young company paying in equity while it scales; intensity falls as revenue grows
- Buybacks at prices below intrinsic value make up for the dilution over time
- A one-off grant (an acquisition, a founder award) rather than a steady level
What to look for in the filing
- The share count after the latest buybacks (the next 10-Q's cover)
- The price paid for the buybacks against the shares' value
- Unvested awards outstanding
What would show the trap does not apply
- The diluted share count falls over two years with buybacks at least equal to the stock compensation
- Stock compensation falls as a share of revenue in each of the next two years
Look again: next filing.
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Triggered severity high · confidence medium
Receivables grew 46% year over year in Q3 2026 against revenue growth of 14%, and the quarter before 116% against 21%; days sales outstanding is 40 against a median of 33 over the eight quarters before. More of each quarter's revenue is still owed by customers.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 2026 |
| Revenue, year over year | +13.7% |
| Receivables, year over year | +45.8% |
| Quarter before | Q2 2026 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +21.3% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +116.3% |
| Days sales outstanding | 39.8 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 32.6 |
| Receivables | $127M |
| Revenue | $302M |
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)
What would explain it innocently
- Seasonality: a quarter that always ends with big shipments
- An acquisition brought its own receivables
- New business with longer standard terms (government, large enterprise)
- Currency: receivables booked in a strengthening currency
What to look for in the filing
- The receivables ageing and the allowance for credit losses
- Any factoring or receivables sold (and whether with recourse)
- Credit terms by customer group
What would show the trap does not apply
- Receivables fall back in line with revenue in the next quarter and DSO returns to its history
- The 10-Q attributes the increase to a disclosed one-off (a large customer's timing, an acquisition) and the allowance for doubtful accounts did not rise
Look again: next filing.
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 29% and net income fell 35% in Q3 2026; the share count fell 7.7%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 2026 |
| Quarter before | Q3 2025 |
| EPS, year before | $0.22 |
| EPS | $0.16 |
| Net income, year before | $16M |
| Net income | $10M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 69.8M shares |
| Diluted shares | 64.4M shares |
| EPS growth | -29.0% |
| Net income growth | -34.7% |
| Diluted shares: change | -7.6% |
| eps from profit | -$0.08 |
| eps from share count | $0.01 |
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 $46M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $33M, best $238M): the P/E of 52.5× is on a normal year.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $2.4B |
| net income ttm | $46M |
| pe ttm | 52.50 |
| net income median fy | $33M |
| pe mid cycle | 71.70 |
| net income peak fy | $238M |
| years | FY2020 / 33.0; FY2021 / 238.0; FY2022 / 41.0; FY2023 / 29.0; FY2024 / -30.0; FY2025 / 18.0 |
| down years in window | 3 |
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 14.65 a share (price 37.24); 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 7.00 to 22.30; across every method the research ran the range is -140 to 149. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 14.65 |
| price | 37.24 |
| terminal value share | +77.5% |
| swing by input | Operating margin / ±3 pts / 7.0 / 22.3; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 12.87 / 16.75; WACC / ±1 pt / 13.17 / 16.59; Working capital per $ of growth / ±10 pts / 13.3 / 16.0 |
| range all methods | -139.78; 148.65 |
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 → Calix: 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.