$47.48+0.34 (+0.72%)
At close: Oct 1, 2026, 4:00 PM ET
Equity Bancshares Inc · Tenets
How EQBK measures up against value, income, timing, and long-hold tenets. Every criterion shows the live number and the pass rule. Always free.
The tenets below and the 0-100 Tenet Score on this report are two separate computations: each tenet runs its own criteria and its own pass rule, while the score is a percentile composite reported as one of four verdict words (Strong, Solid, Mixed or Weak).
0 / 17 qualify todayas of 2026-10-02 · computed nightly from our fundamentals DB; point-in-time auditable.
QUALIFIES
0
meet every gate today
BORDERLINE
4
within one input of the gate
FAILS
9
miss at least one gate
UNKNOWN
4
insufficient data to judge
passesfailsborderlineunknown
Value — six classic philosophies
Buffett Qualitydurable moat
✕ FailsFailsROE ≥ 15%(TTM through Jun 30, 2026)4.9% · ≥ 15.0%
Unknown — no dataGross margin ≥ 40%— · ≥ 40.0%
FailsNet margin ≥ 15%(fiscal 2025: held in its sector pending the TTM check)10.8% · ≥ 15.0%
FailsDebt/equity ≤ 0.5(quarter ending Jun 30, 2026)0.58 · ≤ 0.50
PassesGrowing FCF (multi-yr)(fiscal 2020 to 2025)2.3% per year · > 0
Decided by the pass rule for Buffett Quality.The pass rule for Buffett Quality is what decides that verdict, and it is not restated here. 1 of 5 carry no data.Buffett Quality under The screens ›
Piotroski F-Scorefinancial strength
✕ 3 / 9PassesReturn on assets positive(fiscal 2025)0.4% · > 0
PassesOperating cash flow positive(fiscal 2025)$51.4M · > 0
FailsReturn on assets improving(fiscal 2025)1.2% → 0.4%
PassesEarnings backed by cash (CFO > net income)(fiscal 2025)$51.4M vs $22.7M
FailsLeverage falling (long-term debt / assets)(fiscal 2025)5.2% → 6.2%
FailsCurrent ratio improving(fiscal 2025)We hold no record of the current ratio for both years for this company, so this signal could not be measured. It still scores 0 under this module's conservative rule (a point is never awarded without evidence), and it is not counted as one of the signals we were able to measure.no
FailsNo share dilution (≤ +2%)(fiscal 2025)+19.9%
FailsGross margin expanding(fiscal 2025)This company files on a financial-statement template with no gross-profit line (banks and insurers do not report one), so gross margin could not be measured for either year. It still scores 0 under this module's conservative rule (a point is never awarded without evidence), and it is not counted as one of the signals we were able to measure.no
FailsAsset turnover improving(fiscal 2025)0.04 → 0.03
Decided by the pass rule for Piotroski F-Score.The pass rule for Piotroski F-Score is what decides that verdict, and it is not restated here. These checks score 3 of 9. 2 of 9 carry no data.Piotroski F-Score under The screens ›
Munger Compoundershigh-ROIC quality
— Insufficient inputs (1 of 3 known)Unknown — no dataROIC ≥ 15%— · ≥ 15.0%
PassesNet debt/EBITDA ≤ 3×(fiscal 2025: no quarterly operating income or depreciation line)−6.5× · ≤ 3.0×
Unknown — no dataAltman Z ≥ 3 (safe zone)— · ≥ 3.00
Verdict Unknown for this set.Verdict Unknown for this set. 1 of 3 checks below carry data.Munger Compounders under The screens ›
Magic FormulaROC + earnings yield (threshold check; full rank needs universe)
— UnknownUnknown — no dataEBIT > 0— · > 0
Unknown — no dataEarnings yield EBIT/EV ≥ 6%— · ≥ 6.0%
Unknown — no dataReturn on capital ≥ 25%— · ≥ 25.0%
Verdict Unknown for this set.Verdict Unknown for this set. None of the 3 checks below carry data. The pass rule for Magic Formula is not published separately on the methodology page.About this screen ›
Graham Defensivemargin of safety
✕ FailsFailsSize: market cap ≥ $2B$977.7M · ≥ $2.0B
Unknown — no dataCurrent ratio ≥ 2— · ≥ 2.00
FailsPositive EPS 10y9y
PassesPays a dividend$0.66 · > 0
Unknown — no dataEPS growth ≥ 3%/yr— · ≥ 3.0%
FailsP/E ≤ 15(latest fiscal year: held in its sector pending the TTM check)27.29 · ≤ 15.00
FailsP/E × P/B ≤ 22.5(trailing twelve months)32.26 · ≤ 22.50
Decided by the pass rule for Graham Defensive.The pass rule for Graham Defensive is what decides that verdict, and it is not restated here. 2 of 7 carry no data.Graham Defensive under The screens ›
Lynch GARPgrowth at reasonable price (historical-CAGR basis)
— UnknownUnknown — no dataPEG < 1 (hist. growth)— · < 1.00
Unknown — no dataEPS growth 10–30%— · 10.0%–30.0%
Verdict Unknown for this set.Verdict Unknown for this set. None of the 2 checks below carry data.Lynch GARP under The screens ›
Income — dividend safety
Income & Dividend Safetycoverage over headline yield
~ BorderlinePassesPays a dividend$0.66 · > 0
PassesYield in a healthy band (not a yield trap)1.4% · 1.0%–8.0%
PassesCovered by free cash flow3.34 · ≥ 1.20
PassesEarnings payout not stretched (FFO approx)49.5% · ≤ 85.0%
PassesBalance sheet can sustain the payout−6.5× · ≤ 4.0×
FailsAnnual dividend raised 10+ years running (Aristocrat ≥25, King ≥50)4.00 · ≥ 10.00
Not scored: see the reason belowNo dividend cut in the last 5 yearsThe dividend record on file is shorter than the five years this test covers, so there is no five-year stretch to check for a cut. It is left unscored rather than counted either way.—
Unknown — no data5-year dividend growth ≥ 5%/yr— · ≥ 5.0%
Decided by the pass rule for Income & Dividend Safety.The pass rule for Income & Dividend Safety is what decides that verdict, and it is not published separately on the methodology page. 2 of 8 carry no data.
Dividend Growthraises you can count on
~ BorderlinePassesPays a dividend$0.66 · > 0
FailsAnnual dividend raised 10+ years running (Aristocrat ≥25, King ≥50)4.00 · ≥ 10.00
Not scored: see the reason belowNo dividend cut in the last 5 yearsThe dividend record on file is shorter than the five years this test covers, so there is no five-year stretch to check for a cut. It is left unscored rather than counted either way.—
Unknown — no data5-year dividend growth ≥ 5%/yr— · ≥ 5.0%
PassesCovered by free cash flow3.34 · ≥ 1.20
PassesPayout not stretched (FFO approx)49.5% · ≤ 85.0%
Decided by the pass rule for Dividend Growth.The pass rule for Dividend Growth is what decides that verdict, and it is not restated here. 2 of 6 carry no data.Dividend Growth under The screens ›
Long Hold — quality compounders
Quality Compounderhigh returns, reinvested, few new shares
✕ FailsNot scored: see the reason belowReturn on invested capital ≥ 15% in 4+ of the last 5 yearsOnly 0 of the last 5 fiscal years have return-on-invested-capital on record in our data; 4 are needed to score this criterion, so it is left unscored rather than counted against.—
FailsRevenue compounding ≥ 8%/yr over 5 years5.8% per year · ≥ 8.0%
FailsNot diluting: diluted share count flat-to-down (≤ +1%/yr)5.3% · ≤ 1.0%
PassesFree cash flow margin ≥ 12%18.1% · ≥ 12.0%
PassesEarnings backed by cash (operating cash flow ≥ net income)1.55 · ≥ 1.00
Reading: does not hold. Not a gate checkDisciplined buybacks: actively reducing the share count (bonus)reading, not a gate check5.3%
Decided by the pass rule for Quality Compounder.The pass rule for Quality Compounder is what decides that verdict, and it is not restated here. 1 of 5 carry no data. Lines marked as readings are published beside the checks and are not gate checks.Quality Compounder under The screens ›
Timing — dip & swing receipts
Drawdown Contexta dip, not a collapse
~ BorderlinePassesOff its 52-week high by 8–35% (a dip, not a collapse)9.2% · 8.0%–35.0%
PassesDip within its own normal pullback band0.11
PassesNot past where its dips have historically recovered from1.07
PassesA dip in an uptrend (above a rising 200-day)47.13
FailsHigher-low structure still intactstructure broken · higher low
PassesClear of the earnings blackout (more than 5 days out)39.00 · > 5.00
Decided by the pass rule for Drawdown Context.The pass rule for Drawdown Context is what decides that verdict, and it is not published separately on the methodology page.
Reversal Evidencedaily close onlysigns the pullback is turning
✕ FailsFailsA bullish MACD cross within 10 sessions13.00 · ≤ 10.00
FailsReclaimed a rising 50-day EMA49.16
PassesPrinted a higher lowyes
FailsA volume thrust on the turn (≥ 1.2× normal)0.92 · ≥ 1.20
FailsReversal signals fired: 3 of 4 (MACD·MA·HL·Vol)1.00 · ≥ 3.00
Decided by the pass rule for Reversal Evidence.The pass rule for Reversal Evidence is what decides that verdict, and it is not published separately on the methodology page.
Not-a-Value-Trap Gatecheap for a good reason, not a broken one
✕ FailsFailsIn the cheap half of its own 5-year valuation range(through fiscal 2025)0.8×
FailsEarnings estimates not being cut−0.00
Unknown — no dataReturns on capital not deteriorating—
Decided by the pass rule for Not-a-Value-Trap Gate.The pass rule for Not-a-Value-Trap Gate is what decides that verdict, and it is not published separately on the methodology page. 1 of 3 carry no data.
Quality Floorpasses the quality/value gate on this dip
— Insufficient inputs (2 of 5 known)Unknown — no dataOperating profit is positive— · > 0
Unknown — no dataReturn on invested capital ≥ 10%— · ≥ 10.0%
Not scored: see the reason belowA solvent balance sheet (Altman Z ≥ 1.8, net debt/EBITDA ≤ 4)The Altman Z-score isn't derivable from the statements we have on file, so this two-part test is left unscored.—
FailsQuality score ≥ 5020.80 · ≥ 50.00
PassesRevenue growing over 5 years(fiscal 2020 to 2025)5.8% per year · > 0
Verdict Unknown for this set.Verdict Unknown for this set. 2 of 5 checks below carry data. The pass rule for Quality Floor is not published separately on the methodology page.
Qualified Dipa pullback with receipts, not a falling knife
~ BorderlineA research signal from published criteria, not a recommendation.
FailsDrawdown context9.2% off its 52-week high
FailsReversal evidence1 of 4 signals fired
FailsTrap gate0 of 3 held · 1 no data
Unknown — no dataQuality floor1 of 5 held · 3 no data
Invalidation level (structure break): below this the dip's structure has broken$47.77
Decided by the pass rule for Qualified Dip.The pass rule for Qualified Dip is what decides that verdict, and it is not restated here. 1 of 4 carry no data.Qualified Dip under The screens ›
Trend Alignmentprice in a confirmed uptrend
✕ FailsFailsTrading above its 50-day average49.92
PassesTrading above its 200-day average47.13
Passes50-day average above the 200-day (uptrend stack)49.92
Fails50-day average sloping up−0.00 · > 0
Decided by the pass rule for Trend Alignment.The pass rule for Trend Alignment is what decides that verdict, and it is not published separately on the methodology page.
Relative Strengthoutperforming, ranked vs the universe
✕ FailsPasses3-month return in the top half of the universe0.57 · ≥ 0.50
Passes12-minus-1 momentum in the top half of the universe0.62 · ≥ 0.50
FailsRelative strength vs the S&P 500 improving−0.00 · > 0
FailsEarnings estimates being revised up−0.00
Decided by the pass rule for Relative Strength.The pass rule for Relative Strength is what decides that verdict, and it is not published separately on the methodology page.
Momentum Triggera trigger you can see
✕ FailsFailsMACD above its signal line−0.68
FailsBack above the 50-day on a fresh cross (≤10 sessions)13.00
PassesHigher high and higher low (stair-stepping up)higher high · higher low
FailsA volume thrust on the move (≥ 1.2× normal)0.92 · ≥ 1.20
Decided by the pass rule for Momentum Trigger.The pass rule for Momentum Trigger is what decides that verdict, and it is not published separately on the methodology page.
Volatility Regimecontext, not a signal
Context, not scoredAverage daily swing: normal0.02
Volatility band width: expanded (wide range)0.84
Distance from its 52-week high: a modest pullback0.09
✓
Every verdict is auditableEach criterion shows the live number and the pass rule side by side — a receipt, not a rating. Several of these screens publish their rule in full under The screens; each row links to its own section where there is one.
!
Unknown ≠ failAn “— Unknown” verdict means the inputs were insufficient: context, not a signal, and never counted as a fail.
Computed from our fundamentals DB; historical-CAGR PEG basis for Lynch. Research, not investment advice. Tenet's rulesets are independently developed from publicly available sources, and Tenet is not affiliated with, sponsored by, endorsed by or otherwise associated with any referenced investor or trademark owner. Full notice. MAGIC FORMULA is a trademark of MagicFormulaInvesting.com LLC.