pharma chem · scored in the scan of 2026-06-30
No live quote available for this name.
Market cap, P/E, P/B and dividend yield are computed at the live price, so they match what Google and Yahoo show. The fundamentals behind them (shares, earnings, book value) are point-in-time from EDGAR. All prices are unadjusted — the figures actually on the screen.
Last filed: 10-K on Feb 17, 2026
Has filed its next 10-Q between Apr 28 and May 6 in each of the last 4 years. (Apr 28 – May 6, 2026)
That window is derived from this company's own filing history and recomputed each scan — where its same-quarter filing has landed, carried one cycle forward. It is not a schedule, and nothing here says when the company will actually file. See the filing calendar for the whole universe.
Cash dividends per share, as paid on their ex-dates — the trailing five years the record holds. A history of what was paid, not a statement about what the next payment does.
No dividends on record for IQVin the trailing five years this table holds. The record's floor is 2016 — anything paid before it is outside what this site can testify to. That is a fact about the record, not a judgement — paying nothing is a capital-allocation choice.
| Period ending | 2025-12-31filed 2026-02-17 | 2025-09-30filed — | 2025-06-30filed — | 2025-03-31filed — | 2024-12-31filed 2026-02-17 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating income | $2.18B | — | — | — | $2.20B |
| Net income | $1.36B | — | — | — | $1.37B |
| Operating cash flow | $2.65B |
The trailing record against the 2026-06-30 scan's prices, three lenses per metric: the value, its percentile among valid sector peers, and a z-score against the name's own ~5-year range. All of it is descriptive — where the numbers sit today, not where they are going. A metric that misleads in this sector says why instead of showing a number; an FY tag means the trailing year comes from an annual filing and can lag the latest quarter.
Each factor is rank-normalised against the other 2,449 names scored that day. The centre line is the universe median; right of it is better on that factor. The composite is the four, equally weighted.
Did not make this scan's shortlist — ranked 1,040 of 2,450 scored names. That is not a negative call: it is an absence of one. This ranking has no measurable predictive power: mean information coefficient 0.017 (t=1.21) over 113 months, and its top quintile did NOT beat a plain equal-weight portfolio even at zero trading cost (t=0.14). Tested on survivorship-free, point-in-time data. It is a starting point for research and NOT a buy signal.
| — |
| — |
| — |
| $2.72B |
| Total assets | $29.94B | $28.73B | $28.63B | $27.32B | $26.90B |
| Total liabilities | $23.31B | $22.44B | $22.85B | $21.34B | $20.83B |
| Shareholders' equity | $6.50B | $6.16B | $5.78B | $5.98B | $6.07B |
Straight from SEC EDGAR, consolidated company totals. The filed date is when each number became publicly knowable — not the period it describes. About a third of EDGAR facts are restated comparatives printed inside a later filing, so the two dates are not interchangeable, and only one of them is a fact you could have acted on.
The price story over the trailing 252 sessions, computed from the dividend-adjusted (total-return) series. Beta is measured against our own equal-weight scored universe — the mean daily return of every scored name, not SPY or any index — so it says how the name moved against the average scored name, and it is not the beta Yahoo prints. The drawdown is total-return too: for a payer it is shallower than the price chart's, because the dividends cushion it.
Composite positions among valid sector peers — rankings of the facts above, not of opportunity. The backtest measured what rankings like these predict: nothing.
"—" means the figure was not computable from the filings (a loss-maker's P/E, an NM growth base) — deliberately blank, never guessed. "n/a" with a reason means the sector convention forbids the number outright. † marks an approximation, explained on hover.
