Filing Flows › Companies › Taylor Devices › Analysis traps
Taylor Devices (TAYD): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q1 FY27, to Aug 31, 2026, filed Oct 2, 2026; rules v1.1
Taylor Devices (TAYD): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Aug 31, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved; 6 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 $17K (+0%), from $5M to $5M, but working capital released $1M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $466K: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $2M.
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 $17K (+0%), from $5M to $5M, but working capital released $1M more cash than the year before and capital expenditure fell by $466K: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $2M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY25 |
| Fiscal year | FY26 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $7M |
| Operating cash flow | $7M |
| Capex, year before | $3M |
| Capex | $2M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $5M |
| Free cash flow | $5M |
| Change in FCF | 16,921 |
| Change in capex | −$466K |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $1M |
| Of which: capex cut | $466K |
| Of which: working capital released | $1M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | 91.81 |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | -1536689.00 |
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 Insufficient data
fewer than two fiscal years of stock compensation and share counts on file
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
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 fell 19% and net income fell 18% in Q1 FY26; the share count rose 0.9%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q1 FY26 |
| Quarter before | Q1 FY25 |
| EPS, year before | $0.85 |
| EPS | $0.70 |
| Net income, year before | $3M |
| Net income | $2M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 3.1M shares |
| Diluted shares | 3.1M shares |
| EPS growth | -18.6% |
| Net income growth | -17.9% |
| Diluted shares: change | +0.9% |
| eps from profit | -$0.15 |
| 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: Q1 FY26 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q1 FY25 (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 → Taylor Devices: 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.