Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › Sarepta Therapeutics › Earnings quality

Sarepta Therapeutics earnings quality score

How much of the reported profit is backed by cash, and how many markers of managed earnings the filings show

Score66 / 100 · grade B · rank 522 of 1027

Sarepta Therapeutics (SRPT) scores 66 of 100 for earnings quality, grade B: rank 522 of 1027 companies and 54 of 126 in health. It loses the most points on adjusted earnings 427% below GAAP, discretionary accruals of -6.7% of assets (modified Jones), larger than most, Montier C-score 1 of 5 checks failed. It earns full or near-full marks for profit about as variable as cash flow (smoothness 1.65).

What earned and lost points

ComponentWhat the filings showPointsOf
Accrualsaccruals of -13.9% of assets, lower than 91% of companies (profit backed by cash)2427
Dechow F-scoreDechow F-score 1.27 (above normal)1620
Montier C-scoreMontier C-score 1 of 5 checks failed1620
Discretionary accrualsdiscretionary accruals of -6.7% of assets (modified Jones), larger than most313
Non-GAAP gapadjusted earnings 427% below GAAP013
Earnings smoothnessprofit about as variable as cash flow (smoothness 1.65)77
SRPT: share of the available points, by componentSRPT: share of the available points, by componentAccruals91%Discretionary accruals23%Dechow F-score81%Montier C-score80%Earnings smoothness100%

How the score is built

Eight published measures, each scored against the whole universe or on its own scale and weighted: accruals 20, discretionary accruals 10, Beneish M 15, Dechow F 15, Montier C 15, Piotroski F 10, the non-GAAP gap 10, smoothness 5. A measure that cannot be computed (Beneish for a bank, say) drops out and the rest is rescaled, so every company is scored on what applies to it.

Every company ranked → The full quality workbench, live → Sarepta Therapeutics: cash flow →

Computed from the companies’ own XBRL filings (latest fiscal year) by published formulas; a statistical screen, not an audit or an accusation. A low score means the reported profit shows more of the markers of managed or low-quality earnings than its peers. Not investment advice.