Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › DoubleVerify Holdings › Earnings quality

DoubleVerify Holdings earnings quality score

How much of the reported profit is backed by cash, and how many markers of managed earnings the filings show

Score67 / 100 · grade B · rank 482 of 1027

DoubleVerify Holdings (DV) scores 67 of 100 for earnings quality, grade B: rank 482 of 1027 companies and 108 of 203 in technology. It loses the most points on adjusted earnings 59% below GAAP, discretionary accruals of -5.3% of assets (modified Jones), larger than most, Montier C-score 2 of 5 checks failed. It earns full or near-full marks for Beneish M-score -3.04: clean (below −2.22), Dechow F-score 0.46 (normal).

What earned and lost points

ComponentWhat the filings showPointsOf
Accrualsaccruals of -12.2% of assets, lower than 89% of companies (profit backed by cash)1820
Beneish M-scoreBeneish M-score -3.04: clean (below −2.22)1515
Dechow F-scoreDechow F-score 0.46 (normal)1515
Montier C-scoreMontier C-score 2 of 5 checks failed915
Discretionary accrualsdiscretionary accruals of -5.3% of assets (modified Jones), larger than most310
Piotroski F-scorePiotroski F-score 6 of 9710
Non-GAAP gapadjusted earnings 59% below GAAP010
Earnings smoothnessprofit far steadier than cash flow (smoothness 0.24)05
DV: share of the available points, by componentDV: share of the available points, by componentAccruals88%Discretionary accruals30%Beneish M-score100%Dechow F-score100%Montier C-score60%Piotroski F-score67%Earnings smoothness8%

How the score is built

Eight published measures, each scored against the whole universe or on its own scale and weighted: accruals 20, discretionary accruals 10, Beneish M 15, Dechow F 15, Montier C 15, Piotroski F 10, the non-GAAP gap 10, smoothness 5. A measure that cannot be computed (Beneish for a bank, say) drops out and the rest is rescaled, so every company is scored on what applies to it.

Every company ranked → The full quality workbench, live → DoubleVerify Holdings: cash flow →

Computed from the companies’ own XBRL filings (latest fiscal year) by published formulas; a statistical screen, not an audit or an accusation. A low score means the reported profit shows more of the markers of managed or low-quality earnings than its peers. Not investment advice.