Filing Flows › Companies › Ezcorp › Analysis traps
Ezcorp (EZPW): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 FY26, to Jun 30, 2026, filed Aug 5, 2026; rules v1.1
Ezcorp (EZPW): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 30, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved. 2 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 medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $33M (+42%), from $78M to $110M, but working capital released $18M more cash than the year before: 54% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $18M.
Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.
Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued To review · confidence medium
Net income of $159M is at a high against a median of $39M over eight years; at 15.0× the market is not pricing it as cheap, but a multiple on this year's profit still understates the mid-cycle one (60.9×).
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 63.75 a share (price 28.55); 82% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving wacc by ±1 pt alone takes it from 51.90 to 81.95; across every method the research ran the range is -5 to 212. 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 medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $33M (+42%), from $78M to $110M, but working capital released $18M more cash than the year before: 54% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $18M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY24 |
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $114M |
| Operating cash flow | $149M |
| Capex, year before | $36M |
| Capex | $39M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $78M |
| Free cash flow | $110M |
| Change in FCF | $33M |
| Change in capex | $3M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $18M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | $18M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +54.4% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 17657000.00 |
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 | $12M |
| Revenue | $1.3B |
| SBC / revenue | +1.0% |
| Buybacks | $7M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.6 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 84.4M shares |
| Diluted shares | 83.4M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -1.3% |
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 Insufficient data
fewer than five quarters with receivables and revenue on file (a year-over-year comparison needs five)
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit Not triggered confidence low
Adjusted and GAAP EPS were within 10% of each other in the last 3 quarters (adjusted below GAAP).
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter / adjusted EPS / GAAP EPS / gap | 2025-12-31 / 0.55 / 0.55 / 0.0; 2026-03-31 / 0.58 / 0.61 / -0.052; 2026-06-30 / 0.47 / 0.48 / -0.021 |
| Quarters with adjusted ≥ 10% above GAAP | 0 |
| Quarters compared | 3 |
| Latest gap | -2.1% |
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: 2025-12-31 (adjusted 0.55 vs GAAP 0.55) · 2026-03-31 (adjusted 0.58 vs GAAP 0.61) · 2026-06-30 (adjusted 0.47 vs GAAP 0.48)
C02 Low net debt = no refinancing risk Not triggered confidence medium
Nothing comes due within a year; net debt is $208M.
The figures and how they are read
| Cash and investments | $311M |
| Debt | $519M |
| Net debt | $208M |
| Due within a year | 0 |
| Read from | the current portion of debt on the balance sheet |
| Free cash flow, twelve months | $138M |
| Cash plus free cash flow | $449M |
| Coverage of what is due | — |
| Due in the second year | — |
| Balance sheet date | 2026-06-30 |
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: 2026-06-30 (debt maturities, cash and investments)
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not triggered confidence high
EPS rose 43% and net income rose 44% in Q3 FY26; the share count rose 0.5%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Quarter before | Q3 FY25 |
| EPS, year before | $0.32 |
| EPS | $0.46 |
| Net income, year before | $27M |
| Net income | $38M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 82.9M shares |
| Diluted shares | 83.4M shares |
| EPS growth | +43.1% |
| Net income growth | +44.1% |
| Diluted shares: change | +0.5% |
| eps from profit | $0.14 |
| eps from share count | $0.00 |
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 To review confidence medium
Net income of $159M is at a high against a median of $39M over eight years; at 15.0× the market is not pricing it as cheap, but a multiple on this year's profit still understates the mid-cycle one (60.9×).
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $2.4B |
| net income ttm | $159M |
| pe ttm | 15.00 |
| net income median fy | $39M |
| pe mid cycle | 60.90 |
| net income peak fy | $110M |
| years | FY18 / 39.0; FY19 / 3.0; FY20 / -68.0; FY21 / 9.0; FY22 / 50.0; FY23 / 38.0; FY24 / 83.0; FY25 / 110.0 |
| down years in window | 3 |
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: Q3 FY26 (net income, trailing twelve months)
What would show the trap does not apply
- Profit holds at this level through the next two years (the eight-year peak was a new base, not a top)
- The industry's capacity and prices stay where they are rather than reverting
Look again: next filing.
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 63.75 a share (price 28.55); 82% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving wacc by ±1 pt alone takes it from 51.90 to 81.95; across every method the research ran the range is -5 to 212. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 63.75 |
| price | 28.55 |
| terminal value share | +82.0% |
| swing by input | WACC / ±1 pt / 51.9 / 81.95; Operating margin / ±3 pts / 48.91 / 78.59; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 52.1 / 77.45; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 59.15 / 68.35 |
| range all methods | -4.9; 212.06 |
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 → Ezcorp: cash flow →
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.