Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › Insteel Industries › Analysis traps

Insteel Industries (IIIN): analysis traps

Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q4 FY26, to Oct 3, 2026, filed Oct 29, 2026; rules v1.1

Insteel Industries (IIIN): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Oct 3, 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 high

Free cash flow rose $6M (+31%), from $19M to $25M, but working capital released $22M more cash than the year before: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $13M.

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 high

Free cash flow rose $6M (+31%), from $19M to $25M, but working capital released $22M more cash than the year before: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $13M.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal year beforeFY25
Fiscal yearFY26
Operating cash flow, year before$27M
Operating cash flow$37M
Capex, year before$8M
Capex$12M
Free cash flow, year before$19M
Free cash flow$25M
Change in FCF$6M
Change in capex$4M
Working capital: change in its cash contribution$22M
Of which: capex cut0.00
Of which: working capital released$22M
Share of the increase that need not repeat+374.8%
Operating cash flow before working capital: change-12607000.00

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: FY26 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY25 (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 0.5% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal yearFY26
Stock compensation$3M
Revenue$740M
SBC / revenue+0.5%
Buybacks$3M
Buybacks / SBC0.9
Diluted shares, year before19.6M shares
Diluted shares19.5M shares
Diluted shares: change-0.2%

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

Source: FY26 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)

B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Not triggered confidence medium

Receivables grew 13% against revenue 18% in Q4 FY26; DSO 40 against a median of 38: collections are keeping pace with sales.

The figures and how they are read
QuarterQ4 FY26
Revenue, year over year+17.9%
Receivables, year over year+13.4%
Quarter beforeQ3 FY26
Revenue y/y, quarter before+9.9%
Receivables y/y, quarter before-3.1%
Days sales outstanding39.8
DSO, median of eight quarters38.5
Receivables$89M
Revenue$209M

receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before

Source: Q4 FY26 (receivables and revenue) · Q4 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 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 $30M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $32M, best $125M): the P/E of 19.7× is on a normal year.

The figures and how they are read
market value$583M
net income ttm$30M
pe ttm19.70
net income median fy$32M
pe mid cycle18.00
net income peak fy$125M
yearsFY19 / 6.0; FY20 / 19.0; FY21 / 67.0; FY22 / 125.0; FY23 / 32.0; FY24 / 19.0; FY25 / 41.0; FY26 / 30.0
down years in window3

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: Q4 FY26 (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 → Insteel Industries: 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.