Filing Flows › Companies › CrowdStrike Holdings › Analysis traps
CrowdStrike Holdings (CRWD): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q2 FY27, to Jul 31, 2026, filed Aug 27, 2026; rules v1.1
CrowdStrike Holdings (CRWD): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jul 31, 2026: stock compensation added back = no economic cost; 3 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
Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Triggered · severity high · confidence high
Stock compensation was $1.1B, 22.8% of revenue, in FY26; buybacks were $0 (0.0× the SBC) and the diluted share count still rose 2.4%. '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.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Not triggered confidence high
Free cash flow rose $183M to $1.3B; working capital and lower capex explain 35% 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 | $1.4B |
| Operating cash flow | $1.6B |
| Capex, year before | $255M |
| Capex | $302M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $1.1B |
| Free cash flow | $1.3B |
| Change in FCF | $183M |
| Change in capex | $47M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $64M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | $64M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +34.9% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 166657000.00 |
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 Triggered severity high · confidence high
Stock compensation was $1.1B, 22.8% of revenue, in FY26; buybacks were $0 (0.0× the SBC) and the diluted share count still rose 2.4%. '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 | FY26 |
| Stock compensation | $1.1B |
| Revenue | $4.8B |
| SBC / revenue | +22.8% |
| Buybacks | 0 |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.0 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 244.8M shares |
| Diluted shares | 250.6M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | +2.4% |
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)
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 Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew 17% against revenue 26% in Q2 FY27; DSO 62 against a median of 74: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q2 FY27 |
| Revenue, year over year | +25.8% |
| Receivables, year over year | +17.2% |
| Quarter before | Q1 FY27 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +25.6% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +15.5% |
| Days sales outstanding | 61.7 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 73.7 |
| Receivables | $1.0B |
| Revenue | $1.5B |
receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before
Source: 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
neither a maturity table nor the current portion of debt is 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 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 → CrowdStrike 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.