Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › Pultegroup › Analysis traps

Pultegroup (PHM): analysis traps

Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 2026, to Sep 30, 2026, filed Oct 22, 2026; rules v1.1

Pultegroup (PHM): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved; 5 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 medium

Free cash flow rose $186M (+12%), from $1.6B to $1.7B, but working capital released $817M 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 $626M.

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 medium

Free cash flow rose $186M (+12%), from $1.6B to $1.7B, but working capital released $817M 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 $626M.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal year beforeFY2024
Fiscal yearFY2025
Operating cash flow, year before$1.7B
Operating cash flow$1.9B
Capex, year before$119M
Capex$123M
Free cash flow, year before$1.6B
Free cash flow$1.7B
Change in FCF$186M
Change in capex$4M
Working capital: change in its cash contribution$817M
Of which: capex cut0.00
Of which: working capital released$817M
Share of the increase that need not repeat+438.3%
Operating cash flow before working capital: change-626114000.00

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: FY2025 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY2024 (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 0.3% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal yearFY2025
Stock compensation$55M
Revenue$17.3B
SBC / revenue+0.3%
Buybacks$1.2B
Buybacks / SBC21.9
Diluted shares, year before209.8M shares
Diluted shares199.5M shares
Diluted shares: change-4.9%

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)

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 Insufficient data

neither a maturity table nor the current portion of debt is on file

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 $1.8B is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $2.2B, best $3.1B): the P/E of 14.1× is on a normal year.

The figures and how they are read
market value$25.4B
net income ttm$1.8B
pe ttm14.10
net income median fy$2.2B
pe mid cycle11.40
net income peak fy$3.1B
yearsFY2018 / 1022.0; FY2019 / 1017.0; FY2020 / 1407.0; FY2021 / 1946.0; FY2022 / 2617.0; FY2023 / 2602.0; FY2024 / 3083.0; FY2025 / 2219.0
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: Q3 2026 (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 → Pultegroup: 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.