Filing Flows › Companies › Paylocity Holding › Analysis traps
Paylocity Holding (PCTY): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q1 FY27, to Sep 30, 2026, filed Nov 6, 2026; rules v1.1
Paylocity Holding (PCTY): 0 rules of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 2026. 2 to review; 2 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
Receivables growing = future cash is certain To review · confidence medium
Receivables outgrew revenue in Q1 FY27 (36% against 11%) and DSO is 11 against a median of 9; one quarter can be timing, so this is one to watch rather than a pattern.
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 109.95 a share (price 173.15); 70% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving revenue growth (each year) by ±5 pts alone takes it from 90.20 to 133.43; across every method the research ran the range is 34 to 375. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
Innocent reading: A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary.
Every rule
A01 FCF growth = the business improved Not triggered confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $92M to $497M; working capital and lower capex explain 0% of it, so most of the gain is in operating cash flow itself.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY25 |
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $418M |
| Operating cash flow | $533M |
| Capex, year before | $13M |
| Capex | $36M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $405M |
| Free cash flow | $497M |
| Change in FCF | $92M |
| Change in capex | $23M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | −$17M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | 0.00 |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +0.0% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 132469000.00 |
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)
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 7.8% of revenue, but buybacks of $398M covered it (2.9×) and the diluted share count fell 3.1%: the dilution has been paid for in cash.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Stock compensation | $139M |
| Revenue | $1.8B |
| SBC / revenue | +7.8% |
| Buybacks | $398M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 2.9 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 56.5M shares |
| Diluted shares | 54.8M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -3.1% |
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 To review confidence medium
Receivables outgrew revenue in Q1 FY27 (36% against 11%) and DSO is 11 against a median of 9; one quarter can be timing, so this is one to watch rather than a pattern.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q1 FY27 |
| Revenue, year over year | +10.7% |
| Receivables, year over year | +36.5% |
| Quarter before | Q4 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +11.0% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +20.3% |
| Days sales outstanding | 10.9 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 9.5 |
| Receivables | $57M |
| Revenue | $452M |
receivables and revenue against the same quarter a year earlier; DSO = receivables / quarterly revenue × days, against the median of the eight quarters before
Source: Q1 FY27 (receivables and revenue) · Q1 FY26 (the same quarter a year earlier)
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
1 quarter with a reconciliation table on file (three are needed) and fewer than three quarters with both an adjusted and a GAAP EPS
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 rose 25% and net income rose 20% in Q1 FY27; the share count fell 3.8%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q1 FY27 |
| Quarter before | Q1 FY26 |
| EPS, year before | $0.86 |
| EPS | $1.07 |
| Net income, year before | $48M |
| Net income | $58M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 55.9M shares |
| Diluted shares | 53.7M shares |
| EPS growth | +24.9% |
| Net income growth | +20.1% |
| Diluted shares: change | -3.8% |
| eps from profit | $0.17 |
| eps from share count | $0.04 |
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: Q1 FY27 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q1 FY26 (the same quarter a year earlier)
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not triggered confidence medium
Net income of $279M is a high, but the last eight years rose almost every year (median $141M): a steady climb, not a cycle's top, so the P/E of 33.3× is not on peak profit in that sense.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $9.3B |
| net income ttm | $279M |
| pe ttm | 33.30 |
| net income median fy | $141M |
| pe mid cycle | 66.10 |
| net income peak fy | $270M |
| years | FY19 / 54.0; FY20 / 64.0; FY21 / 71.0; FY22 / 91.0; FY23 / 141.0; FY24 / 207.0; FY25 / 227.0; FY26 / 270.0 |
| down years in window | 0 |
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: Q1 FY27 (net income, trailing twelve months)
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 109.95 a share (price 173.15); 70% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving revenue growth (each year) by ±5 pts alone takes it from 90.20 to 133.43; across every method the research ran the range is 34 to 375. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 109.95 |
| price | 173.15 |
| terminal value share | +70.4% |
| swing by input | Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 90.2 / 133.43; WACC / ±1 pt / 95.07 / 130.8; Operating margin / ±3 pts / 95.77 / 124.12; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 102.7 / 117.2 |
| range all methods | 34.02; 375.06 |
the DCF's point value against the share of it that is the terminal value and the value at each input moved by one step (growth ±5 pts, WACC ±1 pt, margin ±3 pts …); the range across every method the research ran
Source: 2026-11-08 (valuation research)
What would explain it innocently
- A stable, mature business with a narrow range of outcomes, where the point value is a fair summary
- The inputs that matter most are themselves well known (a regulated return, a long contract)
What to look for in the filing
- Which input you believe differs from the research's and why
- What the price implies for growth (the reverse DCF on the fair-value page)
What would show the trap does not apply
- The DCF's value is robust to the terminal growth and discount rate (the range's low end is still above the price)
- The company's cash flows over the next three years track the DCF's early years
Look again: next filing.
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 → Paylocity Holding: 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.