Filing Flows › Companies › Optex Systems Holdings › Analysis traps
Optex Systems Holdings (OPXS): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 FY26, to Jun 28, 2026, filed Aug 11, 2026; rules v1.1
Optex Systems Holdings (OPXS): 2 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 28, 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 medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $5M (+485%), from $1M to $6M, but working capital released $3M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $187K: 64% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $2M.
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 medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $5M (+485%), from $1M to $6M, but working capital released $3M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $187K: 64% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $2M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY24 |
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $2M |
| Operating cash flow | $7M |
| Capex, year before | $681K |
| Capex | $494K |
| Free cash flow, year before | $1M |
| Free cash flow | $6M |
| Change in FCF | $5M |
| Change in capex | −$187K |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $3M |
| Of which: capex cut | $187K |
| Of which: working capital released | $3M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +64.1% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 1914000.00 |
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)
What would explain it innocently
- An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good
- Suppliers agreed longer payment terms in a contract
- Inventory was brought down after a glut and will stay down
What to look for in the filing
- Maintenance capex (what it costs to keep the assets working)
- Supplier payment terms and any supply-chain financing
- Management's capex guidance for next year
What would show the trap does not apply
- Next year's FCF holds or rises with capex back at its earlier level and working capital no longer releasing cash
- The 10-K's capex guidance and the segment capex show the cut is a completed programme, not deferral
- The working-capital release matches a disclosed change in terms or a divestiture, not stretched payables or a collection push
Look again: next filing.
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 0.9% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Stock compensation | $383K |
| Revenue | $41M |
| SBC / revenue | +0.9% |
| Buybacks | 0 |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.0 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 6.8M shares |
| Diluted shares | 6.9M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | +1.3% |
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 Triggered severity medium · confidence medium
Receivables grew 4% year over year in Q3 FY26 against revenue growth of -12%, and the quarter before 33% against -10%; days sales outstanding is 47 against a median of 34 over the eight quarters before. More of each quarter's revenue is still owed by customers.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Revenue, year over year | -12.4% |
| Receivables, year over year | +3.7% |
| Quarter before | Q2 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | -10.3% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +33.5% |
| Days sales outstanding | 46.5 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 34.3 |
| Receivables | $4M |
| Revenue | $10M |
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)
What would explain it innocently
- Seasonality: a quarter that always ends with big shipments
- An acquisition brought its own receivables
- New business with longer standard terms (government, large enterprise)
- Currency: receivables booked in a strengthening currency
What to look for in the filing
- The receivables ageing and the allowance for credit losses
- Any factoring or receivables sold (and whether with recourse)
- Credit terms by customer group
What would show the trap does not apply
- Receivables fall back in line with revenue in the next quarter and DSO returns to its history
- The 10-Q attributes the increase to a disclosed one-off (a large customer's timing, an acquisition) and the allowance for doubtful accounts did not rise
Look again: next filing.
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 fell 15% and net income fell 15% in Q3 FY26; the share count rose 0.1%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Quarter before | Q3 FY25 |
| EPS, year before | $0.22 |
| EPS | $0.18 |
| Net income, year before | $2M |
| Net income | $1M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 6.9M shares |
| Diluted shares | 6.9M shares |
| EPS growth | -15.1% |
| Net income growth | -15.2% |
| Diluted shares: change | +0.1% |
| eps from profit | -$0.03 |
| eps from share count | $0.00 |
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 Insufficient data
no market value or trailing net income in the valuation research
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 → Optex Systems Holdings: 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.