Filing Flows › Companies › F5 › Analysis traps
F5 (FFIV): 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 6, 2026; rules v1.1
F5 (FFIV): 0 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 30, 2026. 2 to review; 2 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
Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued To review · confidence medium
Net income of $727M is at a high against a median of $428M over eight years; at 24.6× the market is not pricing it as cheap, but a multiple on this year's profit still understates the mid-cycle one (41.8×).
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 228.06 a share (price 310.84); 72% 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 191.23 to 271.94; across every method the research ran the range is 89 to 570. 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 Not triggered confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $144M to $906M; working capital and lower capex explain 17% of it, so most of the gain is in operating cash flow itself.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY24 |
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $792M |
| Operating cash flow | $950M |
| Capex, year before | $30M |
| Capex | $43M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $762M |
| Free cash flow | $906M |
| Change in FCF | $144M |
| Change in capex | $13M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $24M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | $24M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +16.5% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 133366000.00 |
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)
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 7.5% of revenue, but buybacks of $502M covered it (2.2×) and the diluted share count fell 1.1%: the dilution has been paid for in cash.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Stock compensation | $231M |
| Revenue | $3.1B |
| SBC / revenue | +7.5% |
| Buybacks | $502M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 2.2 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 59.4M shares |
| Diluted shares | 58.7M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -1.1% |
SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section
Source: FY25 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew 19% against revenue 11% in Q3 FY26; DSO 45 against a median of 51: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Revenue, year over year | +10.8% |
| Receivables, year over year | +19.1% |
| Quarter before | Q2 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +11.0% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +12.1% |
| Days sales outstanding | 44.9 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 50.8 |
| Receivables | $429M |
| Revenue | $865M |
receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before
Source: Q3 FY26 (receivables and revenue) · Q3 FY25 (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
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 11% and net income rose 10% in Q3 FY26; the share count fell 1.6%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Quarter before | Q3 FY25 |
| EPS, year before | $3.25 |
| EPS | $3.62 |
| Net income, year before | $190M |
| Net income | $208M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 58.5M shares |
| Diluted shares | 57.5M shares |
| EPS growth | +11.4% |
| Net income growth | +9.6% |
| Diluted shares: change | -1.6% |
| eps from profit | $0.31 |
| eps from share count | $0.06 |
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 $727M is at a high against a median of $428M over eight years; at 24.6× the market is not pricing it as cheap, but a multiple on this year's profit still understates the mid-cycle one (41.8×).
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $17.9B |
| net income ttm | $727M |
| pe ttm | 24.60 |
| net income median fy | $428M |
| pe mid cycle | 41.80 |
| net income peak fy | $692M |
| years | FY18 / 454.0; FY19 / 428.0; FY20 / 307.0; FY21 / 331.0; FY22 / 322.0; FY23 / 395.0; FY24 / 567.0; FY25 / 692.0 |
| 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 228.06 a share (price 310.84); 72% 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 191.23 to 271.94; across every method the research ran the range is 89 to 570. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 228.06 |
| price | 310.84 |
| terminal value share | +71.6% |
| swing by input | Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 191.23 / 271.94; WACC / ±1 pt / 202.9 / 261.7; Operating margin / ±3 pts / 203.56 / 252.57; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 216.29 / 239.84 |
| range all methods | 88.84; 570.33 |
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 → F5: 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.