Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › Rogers › Analysis traps

Rogers (ROG): 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 28, 2026; rules v1.1

Rogers (ROG): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Sep 30, 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 high · confidence medium

Free cash flow rose $100K (+0%), from $71M to $71M, but working capital released $8M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $26M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $34M.

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 $100K (+0%), from $71M to $71M, but working capital released $8M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $26M: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $34M.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal year beforeFY2024
Fiscal yearFY2025
Operating cash flow, year before$127M
Operating cash flow$101M
Capex, year before$56M
Capex$30M
Free cash flow, year before$71M
Free cash flow$71M
Change in FCF$100K
Change in capex−$26M
Working capital: change in its cash contribution$8M
Of which: capex cut$26M
Of which: working capital released$8M
Share of the increase that need not repeat337.00
Operating cash flow before working capital: change-33600000.00

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 1.3% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal yearFY2025
Stock compensation$11M
Revenue$811M
SBC / revenue+1.3%
Buybacks$52M
Buybacks / SBC4.8
Diluted shares, year before18.6M shares
Diluted shares18.2M shares
Diluted shares: change-2.1%

SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section

Source: FY2025 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)

B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Not triggered confidence medium

Receivables grew 7% against revenue 9% in Q3 2026; DSO 59 against a median of 63: collections are keeping pace with sales.

The figures and how they are read
QuarterQ3 2026
Revenue, year over year+9.3%
Receivables, year over year+6.8%
Quarter beforeQ2 2026
Revenue y/y, quarter before+6.9%
Receivables y/y, quarter before+5.4%
Days sales outstanding59.3
DSO, median of eight quarters63.0
Receivables$155M
Revenue$236M

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 2026 (receivables and revenue) · Q3 2025 (the same quarter a year earlier)

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 rose 166% and net income rose 163% in Q3 2026; the share count fell 1.1%: EPS growth follows profit growth.

The figures and how they are read
QuarterQ3 2026
Quarter beforeQ3 2025
EPS, year before$0.47
EPS$1.26
Net income, year before$9M
Net income$23M
Diluted shares, year before18.1M shares
Diluted shares17.9M shares
EPS growth+165.9%
Net income growth+162.8%
Diluted shares: change-1.1%
eps from profit$0.77
eps from share count$0.01

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 2026 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q3 2025 (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 → Rogers: 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.