Filing Flows › Companies › Nebius Group N.V. › Analysis traps
Nebius Group N.V. (NBIS): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: FY2025, to Dec 31, 2025, filed Apr 30, 2026; rules v1.1
Nebius Group N.V. (NBIS): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Dec 31, 2025: stock compensation added back = no economic cost; 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
Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Triggered · severity high · confidence high
Stock compensation was $83M, 15.7% of revenue, in FY2025; buybacks were $0 (0.0× the SBC) and buybacks did not cover it. 'Adjusted' figures that add SBC back treat pay in shares as free; the cost is borne by every shareholder as dilution, or by the cash spent to buy the shares back.
Innocent reading: A young company paying in equity while it scales; intensity falls as revenue grows.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Not triggered confidence high
Free cash flow did not rise (−$562M → −$3.7B): the trap does not arise.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY2024 |
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $246M |
| Operating cash flow | $385M |
| Capex, year before | $808M |
| Capex | $4.1B |
| Free cash flow, year before | −$562M |
| Free cash flow | −$3.7B |
| Change in FCF | −$3.1B |
| Change in capex | $3.3B |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $530M |
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)
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Triggered severity high · confidence high
Stock compensation was $83M, 15.7% of revenue, in FY2025; buybacks were $0 (0.0× the SBC) and buybacks did not cover it. 'Adjusted' figures that add SBC back treat pay in shares as free; the cost is borne by every shareholder as dilution, or by the cash spent to buy the shares back.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY2025 |
| Stock compensation | $83M |
| Revenue | $530M |
| SBC / revenue | +15.7% |
| Buybacks | 0 |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.0 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 281.0M shares |
| Diluted shares | 247.7M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -11.9% |
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)
What would explain it innocently
- A young company paying in equity while it scales; intensity falls as revenue grows
- Buybacks at prices below intrinsic value make up for the dilution over time
- A one-off grant (an acquisition, a founder award) rather than a steady level
What to look for in the filing
- The share count after the latest buybacks (the next 10-Q's cover)
- The price paid for the buybacks against the shares' value
- Unvested awards outstanding
What would show the trap does not apply
- The diluted share count falls over two years with buybacks at least equal to the stock compensation
- Stock compensation falls as a share of revenue in each of the next two years
Look again: next filing.
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
$24M comes due within a year, 150.1× covered by cash and investments of $3.7B.
The figures and how they are read
| Cash and investments | $3.7B |
| Debt | $4.1B |
| Net debt | $425M |
| Due within a year | $24M |
| Read from | the current portion of debt on the balance sheet |
| Free cash flow, twelve months | — |
| Cash plus free cash flow | $3.7B |
| Coverage of what is due | 150.1 |
| Due in the second year | — |
| Balance sheet date | 2025-12-31 |
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: 2025-12-31 (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 $10M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $222M, best $685M): the P/E of 3895.7× is on a normal year.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $38.2B |
| net income ttm | $10M |
| pe ttm | 3,895.70 |
| net income median fy | $222M |
| pe mid cycle | 172.40 |
| net income peak fy | $685M |
| years | FY2018 / 685.0; FY2019 / 163.0; FY2020 / 345.0; FY2021 / -197.0; FY2022 / 561.0; FY2023 / 222.0; FY2024 / -641.0; FY2025 / 82.0 |
| down years in window | 4 |
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: FY2025 (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 →
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.