Filing Flows › Companies › Epam Systems › Earnings quality
Epam Systems 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 471 of 1027
Epam Systems (EPAM) scores 67 of 100 for earnings quality, grade B: rank 471 of 1027 companies and 102 of 203 in technology. It loses the most points on adjusted earnings 42% below GAAP, accruals of -5.7% of assets, lower than 63% of companies (profit backed by cash), Piotroski F-score 6 of 9. It earns full or near-full marks for profit steadier than cash flow (smoothness 0.67), Montier C-score 0 of 4 checks failed.
What earned and lost points
| Component | What the filings show | Points | Of |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accruals | accruals of -5.7% of assets, lower than 63% of companies (profit backed by cash) | 18 | 29 |
| Montier C-score | Montier C-score 0 of 4 checks failed | 21 | 21 |
| Discretionary accruals | discretionary accruals of +1.3% of assets (modified Jones), smaller than most | 11 | 14 |
| Piotroski F-score | Piotroski F-score 6 of 9 | 10 | 14 |
| Non-GAAP gap | adjusted earnings 42% below GAAP | 0 | 14 |
| Earnings smoothness | profit steadier than cash flow (smoothness 0.67) | 7 | 7 |
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 → Epam Systems: 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.