BETR · Financials(loan brokers) · 10 years of annual accounts filed with the SEC · latest fiscal year ended 2025-12-31
Signed in, this page also says what this company is inside your own portfolio: its weight, its share of your risk, and what buying or selling some of it would change. Sign in ›
Better Home & Finance Holding Co reported revenue of $164.9 million in fiscal 2025. Of the $228.7 million its operations generated over 10 years, 7.3% went back into the business and 7.2% to acquisitions. On the accounting screens, it passes 1 of 6 Piotroski tests; 2 of the six cross-checks between its statements fire.
Revenue, fiscal 2025164.9M
Operating margin-90.0%gross margin —
Return on invested capital—
Free cash flow after stock pay-188.2M-114.1% of revenue
Net debt ÷ EBITDA—net debt —
Piotroski F-score1/6tests of improvement passed
Share counts are in today's shares. The SEC's filings restate only recent years after a split, so these jumps were read as splits and the older years scaled to match — otherwise per-share figures would compare different units:
1-for-30 before fiscal 2023.
Is it growing?
Revenue and the operating income it turns into. Growth that does not reach operating income is growth bought with margin.
RevenueOperating income
-1.0B-500.0M0500.0M
2020
2020
2021Operating income -8.1M
2022Revenue 12.3MOperating income -858.9M
2023
2023
2023
2023Revenue 0Operating income -291.3M
2024Revenue 108.5MOperating income -187.9M
2025Revenue 164.9MOperating income -148.4M
2020202020212022202320232023202320242025
Does it earn more than its capital costs?
Margins say how much of each sale is kept; return on invested capital says how much the business earns on the money it needs to operate. Growth only creates value when that return is above the cost of the capital.
Needs a cost of capital, which comes from the valuation below.
Return on equity
-446.1%
Return on assets
-11.0%
Asset turnover
0.11×
Research & development
16.9% of revenue
Overheads (SG&A)
27.5% of revenue
Is the profit cash, and where does the cash go?
Net income is an accounting opinion; free cash flow is what was left in the bank after investing. Stock-based pay does not leave the bank — shareholders pay it through dilution — so it is shown taken off as well.
Net incomeFree cash flowAfter stock-based pay
-1.0B-500.0M0500.0M1.0B
2020
2020
2021Net income -6.5M
2022Net income -877.1MFree cash flow 926.5MAfter stock-based pay 896.0M
2023
2023
2023
2023Net income -536.4MFree cash flow -160.2MAfter stock-based pay -214.3M
2024Net income -206.3MFree cash flow -383.4MAfter stock-based pay -410.1M
2025Net income -165.9MFree cash flow -167.8MAfter stock-based pay -188.2M
2020202020212022202320232023202320242025
Where 10 years of operating cash went, 2020–2025
228.7M generated by the business. Each band is its share of that total.
Reinvested in the business 7%16.8M
Acquisitions 7%16.6M
Dividends 0%0
Share buybacks 3%7.9M
Kept, or used to pay down debt 82%187.5M
Over the same years it paid 131.9M in stock. The buybacks did not even cover what was handed out in stock.
Per share
Earnings per shareFree cash flow per shareDividend per share
$-100.00$-50.00$0.00$50.00$100.00
2020
2020
2021
2022Earnings per share $-90.33Free cash flow per share $95.42
2023
2023
2023
2023Earnings per share $-58.09Free cash flow per share $-17.35
2024Earnings per share $-13.65Free cash flow per share $-25.37
2025Earnings per share $-10.80Free cash flow per share $-10.92
2020202020212022202320232023202320242025
Shares outstanding
Diluted shares
8.0M10.0M12.0M14.0M16.0M
2020
2020
2021
2022Diluted shares 9.7M
2023
2023
2023
2023Diluted shares 9.2M
2024Diluted shares 15.1M
2025Diluted shares 15.4M
2020202020212022202320232023202320242025
How strong is the balance sheet?
Debt is not bad in itself; debt the business cannot service in a bad year is. Net debt is debt minus cash, and below zero the company holds more cash than it owes.
Net debt ÷ EBITDA
—
Interest coverage
-9× operating income ÷ interest
Current ratio
— current assets ÷ current liabilities
Cash conversion cycle
—
Three classic screens of the accounts
Each asks a different question of the same statements — is it improving, does it look like a company heading for distress, do the accounts resemble ones that were manipulated. None is a verdict; each shows what moves it.
Piotroski F-score
Is the business improving? Nine yes-or-no tests, this year against last.
1of 6 tests passed
✕ProfitableReturn on assets above zerofailed
✕Cash from operationsOperating cash flow above zerofailed
✓Profitability improvedReturn on assets higher than a year beforepassed
✕Profit backed by cashOperating cash flow above net income (low accruals)failed
–Less long-term debtLong-term debt as a share of assets fell — not reportedno data
–More liquidCurrent ratio higher than a year before — not reportedno data
✕No new sharesShare count did not growfailed
–Better gross marginGross margin higher than a year before — not reportedno data
✕Sells more per assetAsset turnover higher than a year beforefailed
Where it misleads: it measures change, not level. An excellent business that stood still for a year scores low; a poor one recovering from a disaster scores high.
Altman Z''-score
Does the balance sheet look like those of companies that went bankrupt?
The accounts lack a line it needs (retained earnings, current assets or liabilities).
Beneish M-score
Do the accounts resemble those of companies that manipulated their earnings?
The accounts lack too many of the lines it needs.
Where the statements disagree
Cross-checks between the income statement, the balance sheet and the cash flow for the latest year, each with the benign reading and the worrying one.
Reported profit comfortably exceeds the cash generated (-166M against -167M).
Benign
Growth consuming working capital, or the seasonality of the year-end.
Worrying
Profit held up by accounting entries that do not turn into money.
The effective tax rate is -0.0%.
Benign
A favourable geographic mix, or legitimate tax credits.
Worrying
Not sustainable; projecting it forward inflates the valuation.
What is it worth, under which assumptions?
A company is worth the cash it will generate, brought back to today. This model projects revenue with growth that fades over the years, applies a free cash flow margin, and discounts the result at the cost of capital. Every assumption says where it came from, and all of them can be changed.
With a free cash flow margin at or below zero in year ten, the business never generates cash for its owners and a DCF says nothing useful. Set a positive margin for year ten to see what it would take.
What it has filed lately
The last twelve months at the SEC, most important first: annual and quarterly reports, events, large holders and insiders.
Every Form 4 filed in the last twelve months, read line by line: 6 filings by 4 people. Open-market purchases and sales are counted apart from awards, option exercises and shares withheld for taxes.
Bought on the open market—none in the period
Sold on the open market$80,9222 sale(s) by 2 insider(s)
Under pre-arranged plans0%of the sales followed a 10b5-1 plan set months earlier
A Form 4 says what happened, when, how many shares and at what price. It does not say why: a sale can be diversification, a tax bill or a plan fixed months earlier, and an award is pay, not a purchase. Nothing here is a reason to buy or sell anything.
Companies like this one
Same SEC industry (loan brokers) first, then the rest of financials.
Accounts from the company's own SEC filings; lines some companies do not report are shown as a dash rather than estimated. The risk-free rate is the 10-year US Treasury yield. A DCF is a way of making assumptions explicit, not a forecast: it states what the company would be worth if the assumptions held. The scores are screens that point where to look, not verdicts. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell.
