Filing Flows › Companies › J M Smucker › Analysis traps
J M Smucker (SJM): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q1 FY27, to Jul 31, 2026, filed Aug 26, 2026; rules v1.1
J M Smucker (SJM): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jul 31, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved. 2 to review; 1 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 $340M (+42%), from $817M to $1.2B, but working capital released $201M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $76M: 82% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $62M.
Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.
Adjusted profit = economic profit To review · confidence low
Adjusted EPS was 10% or more above GAAP in 1 of the last 3 quarters: read the reconciliation before taking the adjusted figure.
A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high
The DCF's point value is 63.52 a share (price 130.92); 74% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 24.40 to 102.64; across every method the research ran the range is -345 to 4,263. 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 Triggered severity medium · confidence medium
Free cash flow rose $340M (+42%), from $817M to $1.2B, but working capital released $201M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $76M: 82% of the increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital rose by $62M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY25 |
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $1.2B |
| Operating cash flow | $1.5B |
| Capex, year before | $394M |
| Capex | $317M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $817M |
| Free cash flow | $1.2B |
| Change in FCF | $340M |
| Change in capex | −$76M |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $201M |
| Of which: capex cut | $76M |
| Of which: working capital released | $201M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +81.7% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | 62100000.00 |
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)
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 0.3% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Stock compensation | $24M |
| Revenue | $9.1B |
| SBC / revenue | +0.3% |
| Buybacks | $6M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 0.2 |
| Diluted shares, year before | — |
| Diluted shares | — |
| Diluted shares: change | — |
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 Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew -4% against revenue 5% in Q1 FY27; DSO 26 against a median of 26: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q1 FY27 |
| Revenue, year over year | +5.0% |
| Receivables, year over year | -4.3% |
| Quarter before | Q4 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | +5.8% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | +6.0% |
| Days sales outstanding | 26.4 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 26.4 |
| Receivables | $616M |
| Revenue | $2.2B |
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)
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit To review confidence low
Adjusted EPS was 10% or more above GAAP in 1 of the last 3 quarters: read the reconciliation before taking the adjusted figure.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter / adjusted EPS / GAAP EPS / gap | 2025-10-31 / 2.1 / 2.26 / -0.076; 2026-01-31 / 2.38 / -6.79 / 3.853; 2026-07-31 / 3.24 / 3.03 / 0.065 |
| Quarters with adjusted ≥ 10% above GAAP | 1 |
| Quarters compared | 3 |
| Latest gap | +6.5% |
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: 2025-10-31 (adjusted 2.10 vs GAAP 2.26) · 2026-01-31 (adjusted 2.38 vs GAAP -6.79) · 2026-07-31 (adjusted 3.24 vs GAAP 3.03)
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
$344M comes due within a year, 4.8× covered by cash and investments of $43M plus $1.6B of free cash flow.
The figures and how they are read
| Cash and investments | $43M |
| Debt | $6.7B |
| Net debt | $6.7B |
| Due within a year | $344M |
| Read from | the current portion of debt on the balance sheet |
| Free cash flow, twelve months | $1.6B |
| Cash plus free cash flow | $1.6B |
| Coverage of what is due | 4.8 |
| Due in the second year | — |
| Balance sheet date | 2026-07-31 |
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: 2026-07-31 (debt maturities, cash and investments)
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 $230M is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $632M, best $876M): the P/E of 60.9× is on a normal year.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $14.0B |
| net income ttm | $230M |
| pe ttm | 60.90 |
| net income median fy | $632M |
| pe mid cycle | 22.10 |
| net income peak fy | $876M |
| years | FY19 / 514.0; FY20 / 780.0; FY21 / 876.0; FY22 / 632.0; FY23 / -91.0; FY24 / 744.0; FY25 / -1231.0; FY26 / -139.0 |
| down years in window | 3 |
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 63.52 a share (price 130.92); 74% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 24.40 to 102.64; across every method the research ran the range is -345 to 4,263. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 63.52 |
| price | 130.92 |
| terminal value share | +74.3% |
| swing by input | Operating margin / ±3 pts / 24.4 / 102.64; WACC / ±1 pt / 39.37 / 105.19; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 40.44 / 91.17; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 54.47 / 72.57 |
| range all methods | -344.72; 4263.19 |
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 → J M Smucker: 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.