Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › Garrett Motion › Analysis traps

Garrett Motion (GTX): analysis traps

Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 2026, to Sep 30, 2026, filed Oct 29, 2026; rules v1.1

Garrett Motion (GTX): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved; 4 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 high · confidence medium

Free cash flow rose $24M (+8%), from $317M to $341M, but working capital released $36M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $19M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $31M.

Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.

Every rule

A01 FCF growth = the business improved Triggered severity high · confidence medium

Free cash flow rose $24M (+8%), from $317M to $341M, but working capital released $36M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $19M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $31M.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal year beforeFY2024
Fiscal yearFY2025
Operating cash flow, year before$408M
Operating cash flow$413M
Capex, year before$91M
Capex$72M
Free cash flow, year before$317M
Free cash flow$341M
Change in FCF$24M
Change in capex−$19M
Working capital: change in its cash contribution$36M
Of which: capex cut$19M
Of which: working capital released$36M
Share of the increase that need not repeat+229.2%
Operating cash flow before working capital: change-31000000.00

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: FY2025 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY2024 (cash flow statement, fiscal year before)

What would explain it innocently

What to look for in the filing

What would show the trap does not apply

Look again: next filing.

A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high

Stock compensation is 0.8% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal yearFY2025
Stock compensation$27M
Revenue$3.6B
SBC / revenue+0.8%
Buybacks$208M
Buybacks / SBC7.7
Diluted shares, year before224.1M shares
Diluted shares203.6M shares
Diluted shares: change-9.2%

SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section

Source: FY2025 (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 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 Not triggered confidence medium

$7M comes due within a year, 86.6× covered by cash and investments of $211M plus $395M of free cash flow.

The figures and how they are read
Cash and investments$211M
Debt$1.4B
Net debt$1.2B
Due within a year$7M
Read fromthe debt maturity table
Free cash flow, twelve months$395M
Cash plus free cash flow$606M
Coverage of what is due86.6
Due in the second year$7M
Balance sheet date2026-09-30

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: FY2025 (debt maturities, cash and investments)

D03 EPS growth = profit growth Insufficient data

no quarter with EPS, net income and diluted shares for both this year and last

E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not triggered confidence medium

Net income of $377M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $313M, best $1.2B): the P/E of 10.1× is on a normal year.

The figures and how they are read
market value$3.8B
net income ttm$377M
pe ttm10.10
net income median fy$313M
pe mid cycle12.20
net income peak fy$1.2B
yearsFY2018 / 1180.0; FY2019 / 313.0; FY2020 / 80.0; FY2021 / 495.0; FY2022 / 390.0; FY2023 / 261.0; FY2024 / 282.0; FY2025 / 310.0
down years in window4

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 2026 (net income, trailing twelve months)

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 → Garrett Motion: 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.