Filing Flows › Companies › Jefferson Capital › Analysis traps
Jefferson Capital (JCAP): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q2 2026, to Jun 30, 2026, filed Aug 13, 2026; rules v1.1
Jefferson Capital (JCAP): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 30, 2026: adjusted profit = economic profit; 3 with insufficient data; 4 not applicable. Each is a question to verify, with the normal explanation that would produce the same figures.
Check these first
Adjusted profit = economic profit Triggered · severity medium · confidence low
Adjusted EPS was at least 10% above GAAP in 3 of the last 3 quarters (on average 18% above). Costs excluded every quarter (restructuring, stock compensation, amortisation of acquired intangibles, litigation) are a recurring cost of the business, not a one-off.
Innocent reading: A genuine one-off this year (an impairment, a settlement) that happens to span several quarters.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Not applicable
a financial company: free cash flow after capex is not the measure of its business
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 2.8% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Stock compensation | $17M |
| Revenue | $613M |
| SBC / revenue | +2.8% |
| Buybacks | 0 |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.0 |
| Diluted shares, year before | — |
| Diluted shares | 30.0M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | — |
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 Not applicable
a financial company: receivables and DSO are not its working capital
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit Triggered severity medium · confidence low
Adjusted EPS was at least 10% above GAAP in 3 of the last 3 quarters (on average 18% above). Costs excluded every quarter (restructuring, stock compensation, amortisation of acquired intangibles, litigation) are a recurring cost of the business, not a one-off.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter / adjusted EPS / GAAP EPS / gap | 2025-09-30 / 0.7942 / 0.59 / 0.257; 2026-03-31 / 0.73 / 0.61 / 0.164; 2026-06-30 / 0.77 / 0.67 / 0.13 |
| Quarters with adjusted ≥ 10% above GAAP | 3 |
| Quarters compared | 3 |
| Latest gap | +13.0% |
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: 2025-09-30 (adjusted 0.79 vs GAAP 0.59) · 2026-03-31 (adjusted 0.73 vs GAAP 0.61) · 2026-06-30 (adjusted 0.77 vs GAAP 0.67)
What would explain it innocently
- A genuine one-off this year (an impairment, a settlement) that happens to span several quarters
- Amortisation of acquired intangibles, which many investors also exclude by choice
- The analysts' 'actual' is not the company's own adjusted figure
What to look for in the filing
- The reconciliation table in the earnings release: which items, how much, how often
- Whether the same items were excluded in earlier years
What would show the trap does not apply
- The reconciliation shows the excluded items ending (a restructuring with its final charge, a settlement paid) and the gap to GAAP closes in the next quarters
- The excluded items are only amortisation of acquired intangibles and the cash paid for the deals is in the investing cash flow
Look again: next filing.
C02 Low net debt = no refinancing risk Insufficient data
neither a maturity table nor the current portion of debt is on file
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not triggered confidence high
EPS fell 96% and net income fell 13% in Q2 2026; the share count rose 1852.8%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q2 2026 |
| Quarter before | Q2 2025 |
| EPS, year before | $16.76 |
| EPS | $0.74 |
| Net income, year before | $48M |
| Net income | $41M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 2.8M shares |
| Diluted shares | 55.5M shares |
| EPS growth | -95.6% |
| Net income growth | -13.3% |
| Diluted shares: change | +1852.8% |
| eps from profit | -$2.24 |
| eps from share count | -$13.78 |
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: Q2 2026 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q2 2025 (the same quarter a year earlier)
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not applicable
a financial company: J06 reads its cycle instead
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 Insufficient data
no market value or trailing net income in the valuation research
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 → Jefferson Capital: 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.