Filing Flows › Companies › Copart › Analysis traps
Copart (CPRT): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q4 FY26, to Jul 31, 2026, filed Sep 29, 2026; rules v1.1
Copart (CPRT): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jul 31, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved. 1 to review; 1 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
FCF growth = the business improved Triggered · severity high · confidence high
Free cash flow rose $38M (+3%), from $1.2B to $1.3B, but capital expenditure fell by $233M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $32M.
Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 22.81 a share (price 31.95); 74% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving revenue growth (each year) by ±5 pts alone takes it from 18.73 to 27.72; across every method the research ran the range is 4 to 83. 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 Triggered severity high · confidence high
Free cash flow rose $38M (+3%), from $1.2B to $1.3B, but capital expenditure fell by $233M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $32M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY25 |
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $1.8B |
| Operating cash flow | $1.6B |
| Capex, year before | $570M |
| Capex | $337M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $1.2B |
| Free cash flow | $1.3B |
| Change in FCF | $38M |
| Change in capex | −$233M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | −$164M |
| Of which: capex cut | $233M |
| Of which: working capital released | 0.00 |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +619.4% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | -31645000.00 |
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)
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 0.8% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Stock compensation | $39M |
| Revenue | $4.7B |
| SBC / revenue | +0.8% |
| Buybacks | $1.6B |
| Buybacks / SBC | 42.1 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 977.6M shares |
| Diluted shares | 956.9M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -2.1% |
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 6% against revenue 2% in Q4 FY26; DSO 64 against a median of 62: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q4 FY26 |
| Revenue, year over year | +2.4% |
| Receivables, year over year | +6.1% |
| Quarter before | Q3 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +2.1% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +4.8% |
| Days sales outstanding | 64.0 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 62.2 |
| Receivables | $809M |
| Revenue | $1.2B |
receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before
Source: Q4 FY26 (receivables and revenue) · Q4 FY25 (the same quarter a year earlier)
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit Not triggered confidence low
Adjusted and GAAP EPS were within 10% of each other in the last 3 quarters.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter / adjusted EPS / GAAP EPS / gap | 2025-10-31 / 0.41 / 0.41 / 0.0; 2026-01-31 / 0.36 / 0.36 / 0.0; 2026-04-30 / 0.43 / 0.43 / 0.0 |
| Quarters with adjusted ≥ 10% above GAAP | 0 |
| Quarters compared | 3 |
| Latest gap | +0.0% |
the analysts' 'actual' (usually the company's adjusted EPS) against GAAP net income ÷ diluted shares for the matching quarter; a gap of 10% or more counts (the stand-in until three releases' reconciliation tables are on file)
Source: 2025-10-31 (adjusted 0.41 vs GAAP 0.41) · 2026-01-31 (adjusted 0.36 vs GAAP 0.36) · 2026-04-30 (adjusted 0.43 vs GAAP 0.43)
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 3% and net income fell 1% in Q3 FY26; the share count fell 3.6%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Quarter before | Q3 FY25 |
| EPS, year before | $0.42 |
| EPS | $0.43 |
| Net income, year before | $407M |
| Net income | $402M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 978.1M shares |
| Diluted shares | 942.8M shares |
| EPS growth | +2.6% |
| Net income growth | -1.0% |
| Diluted shares: change | -3.6% |
| eps from profit | $0.00 |
| 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: Q3 FY26 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q3 FY25 (the same quarter a year earlier)
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not triggered confidence medium
Net income of $1.5B is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $1.2B, best $1.6B): the P/E of 20.3× is on a normal year.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $30.1B |
| net income ttm | $1.5B |
| pe ttm | 20.30 |
| net income median fy | $1.2B |
| pe mid cycle | 24.30 |
| net income peak fy | $1.6B |
| years | FY19 / 592.0; FY20 / 700.0; FY21 / 936.0; FY22 / 1090.0; FY23 / 1238.0; FY24 / 1363.0; FY25 / 1552.0; FY26 / 1484.0 |
| down years in window | 1 |
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: Q4 FY26 (net income, trailing twelve months)
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 22.81 a share (price 31.95); 74% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving revenue growth (each year) by ±5 pts alone takes it from 18.73 to 27.72; across every method the research ran the range is 4 to 83. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 22.81 |
| price | 31.95 |
| terminal value share | +74.1% |
| swing by input | Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 18.73 / 27.72; WACC / ±1 pt / 19.82 / 27.04; Operating margin / ±3 pts / 21.02 / 24.6; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 21.5 / 24.12 |
| range all methods | 3.93; 83.49 |
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 → Copart: 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.