Filing Flows › Companies › Tetra Tech › Analysis traps
Tetra Tech (TTEK): analysis traps
Where its figures could mislead a reader, and what to check before taking them at face value · Data: Q3 FY26, to Jun 28, 2026, filed Jul 31, 2026; rules v1.1
Tetra Tech (TTEK): 1 rule of 10 triggered on the filings to Jun 28, 2026: FCF growth = the business improved. 1 to review; 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 $98M (+29%), from $341M to $439M, but working capital released $175M 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 $76M.
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 22.46 a share (price 40.23); 72% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 16.53 to 28.40; across every method the research ran the range is 12 to 131. 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 medium
Free cash flow rose $98M (+29%), from $341M to $439M, but working capital released $175M 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 $76M.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year before | FY24 |
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Operating cash flow, year before | $359M |
| Operating cash flow | $458M |
| Capex, year before | $18M |
| Capex | $19M |
| Free cash flow, year before | $341M |
| Free cash flow | $439M |
| Change in FCF | $98M |
| Change in capex | $498K |
| Working capital: change in its cash contribution | $175M |
| Of which: capex cut | 0.00 |
| Of which: working capital released | $175M |
| Share of the increase that need not repeat | +177.4% |
| Operating cash flow before working capital: change | -75679000.00 |
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
- 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 0.6% of revenue: small enough that adding it back changes little.
The figures and how they are read
| Fiscal year | FY25 |
| Stock compensation | $34M |
| Revenue | $5.4B |
| SBC / revenue | +0.6% |
| Buybacks | $250M |
| Buybacks / SBC | 7.4 |
| Diluted shares, year before | 270.0M shares |
| Diluted shares | 267.1M shares |
| Diluted shares: change | -1.1% |
SBC / revenue from the cash flow statement's add-back; the diluted weighted share count year over year; buybacks from the financing section
Source: FY25 (stock compensation, buybacks and the diluted share count, fiscal year)
B02 Receivables growing = future cash is certain Not triggered confidence medium
Receivables grew -5% against revenue -4% in Q3 FY26; DSO 74 against a median of 78: collections are keeping pace with sales.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Revenue, year over year | -4.5% |
| Receivables, year over year | -4.5% |
| Quarter before | Q2 FY26 |
| Revenue y/y, quarter before | -7.7% |
| Receivables y/y, quarter before | -14.4% |
| Days sales outstanding | 73.8 |
| DSO, median of eight quarters | 78.2 |
| Receivables | $1.1B |
| Revenue | $1.3B |
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 FY26 (receivables and revenue) · Q3 FY25 (the same quarter a year earlier)
B08 Adjusted profit = economic profit Not triggered confidence low
Adjusted and GAAP EPS were within 10% of each other in the last 4 quarters.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter / adjusted EPS / GAAP EPS / gap | 2025-09-30 / 0.45 / 0.48 / -0.067; 2025-12-31 / 0.35 / 0.4 / -0.143; 2026-03-31 / 0.34 / 0.36 / -0.059; 2026-06-30 / 0.4221 / 0.42 / 0.005 |
| Quarters with adjusted ≥ 10% above GAAP | 0 |
| Quarters compared | 4 |
| Latest gap | +0.5% |
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: 2025-09-30 (adjusted 0.45 vs GAAP 0.48) · 2025-12-31 (adjusted 0.35 vs GAAP 0.40) · 2026-03-31 (adjusted 0.34 vs GAAP 0.36) · 2026-06-30 (adjusted 0.42 vs GAAP 0.42)
C02 Low net debt = no refinancing risk Not triggered confidence medium
$3M comes due within a year, 249.0× covered by cash and investments of $231M plus $547M of free cash flow.
The figures and how they are read
| Cash and investments | $231M |
| Debt | $804M |
| Net debt | $573M |
| Due within a year | $3M |
| Read from | the debt maturity table |
| Free cash flow, twelve months | $547M |
| Cash plus free cash flow | $778M |
| Coverage of what is due | 249.0 |
| Due in the second year | $591M |
| Balance sheet date | 2026-06-28 |
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: FY25 (debt maturities, cash and investments)
D03 EPS growth = profit growth Not triggered confidence high
EPS fell 2% and net income fell 4% in Q3 FY26; the share count fell 1.9%: EPS growth follows profit growth.
The figures and how they are read
| Quarter | Q3 FY26 |
| Quarter before | Q3 FY25 |
| EPS, year before | $0.43 |
| EPS | $0.42 |
| Net income, year before | $114M |
| Net income | $110M |
| Diluted shares, year before | 264.9M shares |
| Diluted shares | 259.8M shares |
| EPS growth | -1.9% |
| Net income growth | -3.7% |
| Diluted shares: change | -1.9% |
| eps from profit | -$0.02 |
| 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 FY26 (net income, diluted shares, EPS) · Q3 FY25 (the same quarter a year earlier)
E02 Low P/E at a cyclical peak = undervalued Not triggered confidence medium
Net income of $437M is a high, but the last eight years rose almost every year (median $248M): a steady climb, not a cycle's top, so the P/E of 23.9× is not on peak profit in that sense.
The figures and how they are read
| market value | $10.5B |
| net income ttm | $437M |
| pe ttm | 23.90 |
| net income median fy | $248M |
| pe mid cycle | 42.20 |
| net income peak fy | $333M |
| years | FY18 / 137.0; FY19 / 159.0; FY20 / 174.0; FY21 / 233.0; FY22 / 263.0; FY23 / 273.0; FY24 / 333.0; FY25 / 248.0 |
| down years in window | 1 |
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 22.46 a share (price 40.23); 72% of it is the terminal value, a number about years no one has seen. Moving operating margin by ±3 pts alone takes it from 16.53 to 28.40; across every method the research ran the range is 12 to 131. The value is a range; the decimals are not information.
The figures and how they are read
| dcf value | 22.46 |
| price | 40.23 |
| terminal value share | +72.3% |
| swing by input | Operating margin / ±3 pts / 16.53 / 28.4; Revenue growth (each year) / ±5 pts / 17.7 / 28.25; WACC / ±1 pt / 18.64 / 28.17; Tax rate / ±5 pts / 20.84 / 24.08 |
| range all methods | 11.62; 131.46 |
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 → Tetra Tech: 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.