Filing Flows › Companies › USA Compression Partners, LP › Earnings quality
USA Compression Partners, LP earnings quality score
How much of the reported profit is backed by cash, and how many markers of managed earnings the filings show
Score76 / 100 · grade B · rank 144 of 1027
USA Compression Partners, LP (USAC) scores 76 of 100 for earnings quality, grade B: rank 144 of 1027 companies and 13 of 55 in utilities. It loses the most points on discretionary accruals of -5.3% of assets (modified Jones), larger than most, adjusted earnings 14% below GAAP, accruals of -10.5% of assets, lower than 85% of companies (profit backed by cash). It earns full or near-full marks for Montier C-score 0 of 4 checks failed, profit about as variable as cash flow (smoothness 0.74).
What earned and lost points
| Component | What the filings show | Points | Of |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accruals | accruals of -10.5% of assets, lower than 85% of companies (profit backed by cash) | 28 | 33 |
| Montier C-score | Montier C-score 0 of 4 checks failed | 25 | 25 |
| Discretionary accruals | discretionary accruals of -5.3% of assets (modified Jones), larger than most | 5 | 17 |
| Non-GAAP gap | adjusted earnings 14% below GAAP | 9 | 17 |
| Earnings smoothness | profit about as variable as cash flow (smoothness 0.74) | 8 | 8 |
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 → USA Compression Partners, LP: 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.