Filing Flows › Companies › Concentrix › Analysis traps
Concentrix (CNXC): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 FY26, to Aug 31, 2026, filed Oct 7, 2026; rules v1.1
Concentrix (CNXC): 2 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Aug 31, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved; low net debt = no refinancing risk; 2 with insufficient data; 4 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 high
Free cash flow rose $144M (+34%), from $429M to $572M, but working capital released $81M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $4M: 59% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $58M.
Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.
Low net debt = no refinancing risk Triggered · severity medium · confidence medium
$866M of debt comes due within a year against $245M of cash and investments and $575M of free cash flow over the last twelve months: $46M short, to be refinanced or raised. Net debt of $3.7B says nothing about when the debt falls due.
Innocent reading: A committed, undrawn credit facility covers the gap (not visible in the balance sheet).
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Triggered severity medium · confidence high
Free cash flow rose $144M (+34%), from $429M to $572M, but working capital released $81M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $4M: 59% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $58M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY24 |
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $667M |
| Operating cash flow | $807M |
| Capex, year before | $239M |
| Capex | $234M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $429M |
| Free cash flow | $572M |
| Change in FCF | $144M |
| Change in capex | −$4M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $81M |
| Of which: capex cut | $4M |
| Of which: working capital released | $81M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +59.4% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 58349000.00 |
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: FY25 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY24 (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 Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 1.0% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Stock compensation | $96M |
| Revenue | $9.8B |
| SBC / revenue | +1.0% |
| Buybacks | $169M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 1.8 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 65.1M shares |
| Diluted shares | 63.0M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -3.2% |
SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section
Source: FY25 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew -4% against revenue -1% in Q3 FY26; DSO 74 against a median of 75: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Revenue, year over year | -1.2% |
| Receivables, year over year | -4.0% |
| Quarter before | Q2 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +1.9% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | -3.6% |
| Days sales outstanding | 74.2 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 74.8 |
| Receivables | $2.0B |
| Revenue | $2.5B |
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 FY26 (receivables and revenue) · Q3 FY25 (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 Triggered severity medium · confidence medium
$866M of debt comes due within a year against $245M of cash and investments and $575M of free cash flow over the last twelve months: $46M short, to be refinanced or raised. Net debt of $3.7B says nothing about when the debt falls due.
The figures and how they are read
| Cash and investments | $245M |
| Debt | $3.9B |
| Net debt | $3.7B |
| Due within a year | $866M |
| Read from | the debt maturity table |
| Free cash flow, twelve months | $575M |
| Cash plus free cash flow | $820M |
| Coverage of what is due | 0.9 |
| Due in the second year | $1.1B |
| Balance sheet date | 2026-08-31 |
due within a year from the maturity table (else the current portion of debt), against cash and investments plus free cash flow over the last twelve months (zero if negative); no credit lines assumed
Source: FY25 (debt maturities, cash and investments)
What would explain it innocently
- A committed, undrawn credit facility covers the gap (not visible in the balance sheet)
- The notes are routinely rolled over in the commercial-paper or bond market at an investment-grade rating
- Cash held abroad or in subsidiaries can be moved to where the debt is
- A sale of a business or asset already agreed brings the cash
What to look for in the filing
- Undrawn committed facilities and their covenants
- The cost and rating of the refinancing
- Restricted cash and the operating minimum
What would show the trap does not apply
- The 10-K lists an undrawn credit facility that covers the debt due, or the maturity is refinanced before it falls due
- Cash plus FCF of the next quarter exceeds the debt due within a year
Look again: next filing.
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 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 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 → Concentrix: 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.