Filing Flows

Filing Flows › Companies › Toll Brothers › Analysis traps

Toll Brothers (TOL): analysis traps

Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 FY26, to Jul 31, 2026, filed Aug 28, 2026; rules v1.1

Toll Brothers (TOL): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jul 31, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved. 1 to review; 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 high

Free cash flow rose $90M (+10%), from $937M to $1.0B, but working capital released $151M more cash than the year before: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $49M.

Innocent reading: An expansion programme finished, so capex fell back to maintenance levels for good.

A precise DCF value = the true value To review · confidence high

The DCF's point value is 148.21 a share (price 153.42); 71% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 114.28 to 182.14; across every method the research ran the range is 71 to 999. 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 high · confidence high

Free cash flow rose $90M (+10%), from $937M to $1.0B, but working capital released $151M more cash than the year before: more than the whole increase came from sources that need not repeat. Operating cash flow before working capital fell by $49M.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal year beforeFY24
Fiscal yearFY25
Operating cash flow, year before$1.0B
Operating cash flow$1.1B
Capex, year before$74M
Capex$86M
Free cash flow, year before$937M
Free cash flow$1.0B
Change in FCF$90M
Change in capex$13M
Working capital: change in its cash contribution$151M
Of which: capex cut0.00
Of which: working capital released$151M
Share of the increase that need not repeat+168.8%
Operating cash flow before working capital: change-49195000.00

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: FY25 (cash flow statement, fiscal year) · FY24 (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 0.3% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.

The figures and how they are read
Fiscal yearFY25
Stock compensation$31M
Revenue$11.0B
SBC / revenue+0.3%
Buybacks$651M
Buybacks / SBC21.1
Diluted shares, year before104.7M shares
Diluted shares99.8M shares
Diluted shares: change-4.7%

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 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 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 $1.2B is not at a cyclical high against the last eight years (median $1.3B, best $1.6B): the P/E of 12.1× is on a normal year.

The figures and how they are read
market value$14.5B
net income ttm$1.2B
pe ttm12.10
net income median fy$1.3B
pe mid cycle11.30
net income peak fy$1.6B
yearsFY18 / 748.0; FY19 / 590.0; FY20 / 447.0; FY21 / 834.0; FY22 / 1286.0; FY23 / 1372.0; FY24 / 1571.0; FY25 / 1346.0
down years in window3

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 148.21 a share (price 153.42); 71% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 114.28 to 182.14; across every method the research ran the range is 71 to 999. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.

The figures and how they are read
dcf value148.21
price153.42
terminal value share+70.6%
swing by inputOperating margin / ±3 pts / 114.28 / 182.14; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 119.35 / 182.96; WACC / ±1 pt / 127.03 / 177.85; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 137.82 / 158.6
range all methods70.62; 998.78

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

What to look for in the filing

What would show the trap does not apply

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 → Toll Brothers: 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.