Filing Flows › Companies › Aerkomm › Analysis traps
Aerkomm (): 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 Sep 18, 2026; rules v1.1
Aerkomm (): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 30, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved; 6 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
FCF growth = the business improved Triggered · severity medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $86K, from −$6M to −$6M, but capital expenditure fell by $72K: 84% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $818K.
Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Triggered severity medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $86K, from −$6M to −$6M, but capital expenditure fell by $72K: 84% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $818K.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY2024 |
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | −$6M |
| Operating cash flow | −$6M |
| Capex, year before | 88,717 |
| Capex | 16,484 |
| Free cash flow, year before | −$6M |
| Free cash flow | −$6M |
| Change in FCF | 86,230 |
| Change in capex | -72,233 |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | −$804K |
| Of which: capex cut | 72,233 |
| Of which: working capital released | 0.00 |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +83.8% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 817541.00 |
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 Insufficient data
no revenue for the fiscal year of the share count
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 balance-sheet cash or debt on file
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not applicable
a loss in one of the quarters: EPS growth has no meaning
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Insufficient data
no market value or trailing net income in the valuation research
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value Insufficient data
no DCF in the valuation research for this company
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 → Aerkomm: 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.