Filing Flows › Companies › Veeva Systems › Earnings quality
Veeva Systems 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 495 of 1027
Veeva Systems (VEEV) scores 66 of 100 for earnings quality, grade B: rank 495 of 1027 companies and 112 of 203 in technology. It loses the most points on Montier C-score 3 of 4 checks failed, adjusted earnings 30% below GAAP, accruals of -6.2% of assets, lower than 67% of companies (profit backed by cash). It earns full or near-full marks for discretionary accruals of +0.5% of assets (modified Jones), smaller than most, Beneish M-score -2.63: clean (below −2.22), Dechow F-score 0.64 (normal).
What earned and lost points
| Component | What the filings show | Points | Of |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accruals | accruals of -6.2% of assets, lower than 67% of companies (profit backed by cash) | 13 | 20 |
| Beneish M-score | Beneish M-score -2.63: clean (below −2.22) | 15 | 15 |
| Dechow F-score | Dechow F-score 0.64 (normal) | 15 | 15 |
| Montier C-score | Montier C-score 3 of 4 checks failed | 4 | 15 |
| Discretionary accruals | discretionary accruals of +0.5% of assets (modified Jones), smaller than most | 9 | 10 |
| Piotroski F-score | Piotroski F-score 7 of 9 | 8 | 10 |
| Non-GAAP gap | adjusted earnings 30% below GAAP | 0 | 10 |
| Earnings smoothness | profit steadier than cash flow (smoothness 0.42) | 2 | 5 |
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 → Veeva Systems: 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.