Filing Flows › Companies › Post Holdings › Analysis traps
Post Holdings (POST): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 FY26, to Jun 30, 2026, filed Aug 6, 2026; rules v1.1
Post Holdings (POST): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 30, 2026: adjusted profit = economic profit. 1 to review; 2 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 22% 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.
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 218.50 a share (price 82.87); 81% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving wacc by ±1 pt alone takes it from 131.42 to 394.53; across every method the research ran the range is -280 to 858. 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 high
Free cash flow did not rise ($502M → $488M): the trap does not arise.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY24 |
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $932M |
| Operating cash flow | $998M |
| Capex, year before | $430M |
| Capex | $510M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $502M |
| Free cash flow | $488M |
| Change in FCF | −$14M |
| Change in capex | $81M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | −$40M |
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)
A07 Stock compensation added back = no economic cost Not triggered confidence high
Stock compensation is 1.0% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Stock compensation | $82M |
| Revenue | $8.2B |
| SBC / revenue | +1.0% |
| Buybacks | $709M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 8.7 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 66.9M shares |
| Diluted shares | 62.9M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -6.0% |
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 Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew 1% against revenue -2% in Q3 FY26; DSO 33 against a median of 30: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Revenue, year over year | -1.8% |
| Receivables, year over year | +0.7% |
| Quarter before | Q2 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +4.7% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +4.4% |
| Days sales outstanding | 33.4 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 30.0 |
| Receivables | $699M |
| Revenue | $1.9B |
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)
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 22% 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 | 2025-12-31 / 2.13 / 1.71 / 0.197; 2026-03-31 / 1.94 / 1.56 / 0.196; 2026-06-30 / 1.78 / 1.29 / 0.275 |
| Quarters with adjusted ≥ 10% above GAAP | 3 |
| Quarters compared | 3 |
| Latest gap | +27.5% |
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: 2025-12-31 (adjusted 2.13 vs GAAP 1.71) · 2026-03-31 (adjusted 1.94 vs GAAP 1.56) · 2026-06-30 (adjusted 1.78 vs GAAP 1.29)
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 Not triggered confidence medium
$1M comes due within a year, 682.2× covered by cash and investments of $266M plus $553M of free cash flow.
The figures and how they are read
| Cash and investments | $266M |
| Debt | $7.7B |
| Net debt | $7.4B |
| Due within a year | $1M |
| Read from | the debt maturity table |
| Free cash flow, twelve months | $553M |
| Cash plus free cash flow | $819M |
| Coverage of what is due | 682.2 |
| Due in the second year | $576M |
| Balance sheet date | 2026-06-30 |
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: FY25 (debt maturities, cash and investments)
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not triggered confidence high
EPS fell 29% and net income fell 42% in Q3 FY26; the share count fell 17.8%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Quarter before | Q3 FY25 |
| EPS, year before | $1.74 |
| EPS | $1.24 |
| Net income, year before | $109M |
| Net income | $63M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 62.4M shares |
| Diluted shares | 51.3M shares |
| EPS growth | -29.1% |
| Net income growth | -41.7% |
| Diluted shares: change | -17.8% |
| eps from profit | -$0.73 |
| eps from share count | $0.22 |
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 Not triggered confidence medium
Net income of $293M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $336M, best $757M): the P/E of 14.5× is on a normal year.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $4.3B |
| net income ttm | $293M |
| pe ttm | 14.50 |
| net income median fy | $336M |
| pe mid cycle | 12.70 |
| net income peak fy | $757M |
| years | FY18 / 467.0; FY19 / 125.0; FY20 / 1.0; FY21 / 167.0; FY22 / 757.0; FY23 / 301.0; FY24 / 367.0; FY25 / 336.0 |
| 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: Q3 FY26 (net income, trailing twelve months)
E07 A precise DCF value = the true value To review confidence high
The DCF's point value is 218.50 a share (price 82.87); 81% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving wacc by ±1 pt alone takes it from 131.42 to 394.53; across every method the research ran the range is -280 to 858. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 218.50 |
| price | 82.87 |
| terminal value share | +81.5% |
| swing by input | WACC / ±1 pt / 131.42 / 394.53; Operating margin / ±3 pts / 107.88 / 329.12; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 148.67 / 302.34; Terminal growth / ±0.5 pt / 191.09 / 256.89 |
| range all methods | -279.95; 858.42 |
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 → Post Holdings: 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.