ChargePoint Holdings
It sells electric-car chargers to the owners of car parks, depots and shops, then charges them a subscription for the software that lets drivers in and bills them.
The scores
Growth2/4 ↑
Fourth straight year-over-year rise, but two-year revenue is nearly flat and Q3 2027 is guided to 4% growth.
Business quality2/4 →
A real network position in slow charging, but hardware earns 21 cents and a private rival owns the fast-charging frontier.
Financial position2/4 ↑
Cash of $95.7M above a $25.0M covenant, funded by finite inventory, with cash interest arriving in November.
Execution record2/4 ↑
Two clean beats of its own guidance top, against a year called an inflection point in which revenue fell.
Per share capture1/4 ↓
Shares grew 10.42% in six months, two thirds of it debt service, with a $150.0M share facility still unused.
Potential2/4 →
A large port build-out, but the US adoption rate that drives it is falling and nothing large is signed.
Risk profile3/4 ↓
No customer above 10%, but 82% of revenue sits in one country whose policy has just turned against it.
Valuation2/4 ↓
At 94 cents per sales dollar the price needs the margin plan AND about 30% more revenue than guided.
Evidence quality3/4 →
Every load-bearing figure is filed, but the margin and cost path rest on management statements graded rather than verified.
The Verdict
We rate ChargePoint unattractive. It runs America's largest network of car chargers, selling the equipment and a software subscription, but it still loses money and pays its lenders in new shares, so the business is weak. Its best quarter in years was mostly one-offs the company itself named, and management then guided the next quarter lower. The price looks cheap against sales, but it assumes sales far above the company's own forecast, so it is full, not cheap. The road to profit runs through a refinancing that would likely come ahead of today's shareholders, and a lower price buys more of that.
The long caseEvery electric car must be charged, but in America electric car sales are falling while hybrids, which need no charger, gain; ChargePoint needs that trend to turn back.
The evidence under this - 9 claims
- The company has an interest in naming the one-off, because it makes the underlying margin look durable; the offsetting risk is that the tariffs which produced the refund also produced the cost, and neither side is separately disclosed
- Normalised 35% is up only 2 points year over year against the 5 points the headline shows, so most of the improvement a reader sees is the refund
- ChargePoint beat the top of its own range in each of the last two quarters, so the guide may be conservative rather than a forecast of decline
- The chief financial officer explained the step down as a home-charging bump around large retail sale days that is not expected to repeat, which is a stated reason rather than caution
- $69.1M of the debt is future interest capitalised into the carrying value rather than principal, so a reader who strikes net debt on principal alone gets a smaller figure and a cheaper ratio
- Against its own six-year median the multiple is far lower - the vendor puts prior-year median price-to-sales at 2.77 times - so the business is cheap against its own history, which was the history of a growing company
- The measure excludes stock-based compensation, so a reader who counts that cost needs materially more revenue still, and one who accepts management's adjustments needs less than a GAAP calculation would imply
- Adjusted EBITDA loss was already down to $4.8M, so on management's preferred measure the gap to breakeven is much smaller than this operating calculation suggests
The company
An electric car has to be plugged in somewhere, and the owner of that somewhere, an employer, a landlord, a fleet depot or a shop, is ChargePoint's customer, not the driver. It sells them the charging post: a slow one for a car park, or a fast one for a highway site.
Then it sells the software account that makes the post useful. It lets drivers in, meters the electricity, sets the price and takes payment. ChargePoint mostly does not own the chargers itself.
The evidence under this - 2 claims
How it makes money
Two ways. In the quarter to July, hardware brought in $62.9M of $116.1M and subscriptions $43.7M. The hardware is a one-off sale at thin margins: 21 cents of gross profit on the dollar, even helped by a tariff refund. The subscription recurs and keeps 59 cents.
The evidence under this - 2 claims
Where the money comes from, stream by stream
| Stream | Share of sales (Q2 FY2027) | How it earns it |
|---|---|---|
| Networked Charging Systems | 54.2% | Sells AC and DC charging hardware to site hosts and fleets, plus fees for passing on regulatory credits. |
| Subscriptions | 37.6% | Software that runs and bills the chargers, plus warranty and maintenance plans, paid over the contract term. |
| Other | 8.2% | Driver fees at stations ChargePoint owns, payment-processing fees on customers' stations, and professional services. |
Who runs it
Rick Wilmer has run ChargePoint since November 2023 and Mansi Khetani its finances since 2024. They have cut costs hard, so losses have more than halved, but sales are below where they started. Insiders own about 4%, much of it in warrants rather than shares, and nobody has bought stock with their own money. Pay rides on an adjusted profit measure, and nothing in it suffers when new shares are issued to pay the lenders.
The evidence under this - 4 claims
- No measure in the plan pays on cash flow, the share count or the debt, so issuing shares to pay interest (C26, C27) costs the plan nothing.
- Earlier PRSUs carried share-price targets and none reached its minimum, so the stock-price half of past pay has been worth nothing (S12).
Why it wins, and who could beat it
Why customers come back
It is a network. Drivers download the app because it finds chargers, and site owners buy ChargePoint because the drivers are already in the app. More than 1.48 million drivers use it each quarter.
The outside evidence is a rival's own filing. Blink's annual report says this market is won partly on the size of the installed base, and names ChargePoint first among its American competitors.
The evidence under this - 2 claims
The threat
ChargePoint's chief executive calls its new 600-kilowatt charger one competitors 'simply cannot match'. Alpitronic's charger of the same power had found its first buyer, IONITY, by April 2025.
Tesla sells site owners fast charging with its own software, and a basic charger with no software is the cheap answer wherever nobody needs billing.
The evidence under this - 4 claims
- A private rival's 600 kW product was procured by IONITY in April 2025 and rolling out from the second half of that year, roughly a year before this demonstration
- ChargePoint's own Express Solo is at early-access shipment stage, so the comparison is a demonstration against a deployed product
- ChargePoint's own Express Solo launch claim of up to 600 kW dates from June 2026, still fourteen months after a European operator contracted for a rival's 600 kW product
The rivals: TSLA, BLNK, and 2 more that are private, in-house or listed abroad.
Who else does this, rival by rival
| Ticker | Rival | How far along | Priced against it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private | Alpitronic HYC1000Priced against it: Private | On sale | Private |
| TSLA | Tesla SuperchargerPriced against it: Small part of it | On sale | Small part of it |
| Not listed | Non-networked 'basic' chargersPriced against it: Not listed | On sale | Not listed |
| BLNK | Blink ChargingPriced against it: Same product | On sale | Same product |
How big it could get
How big this could get
A national laboratory estimates America needs 182,000 public fast ports, a million public slow ones and 26.8 million private ones by 2030. That assumes the electric cars arrive, and they are slowing: battery cars fell to 6% of new American sales in the first half of 2026 from 7%, while hybrids, which need no charger, hit a record 16%. Nobody publishes what a port is worth to the company that sells it.
The evidence under this - 2 claims
Who has signed
Customers have signed for $255.6M of future revenue, half of it due within a year. The named deals are announcements whose terms appear in no filing: an initial $7.5M from RAW Charging, about 2,500 apartment ports with OBE Power, more than 200 fast-charging ports with Optimus, and 130 for Santa Monica's buses, which the city has not confirmed.
The evidence under this - 5 claims
The City of Santa Monica's own press release of 9 April 2026 describes the $56M programme and names no vendor. It predates the company's announcement, so it is an absence of confirmation rather than a contradiction, but the agreement is unconfirmed outside the company
Where the growth is coming from, business by business
Where the growth is coming from
| Business | Share of revenue | Growth: last quarter | Last half-year | Last year | Share in 3 years at its half-year rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product | 54% | +24.8% | +13.4% | +10.8% | 58% |
| License and Service | 38% | +9.5% | +8.4% | +10.7% | 35% |
| Product and Service, Other | 8% | +14.3% | +8.6% | -9.8% | 8% |
| Whole company | 100% | +17.7% | +11.0% | +8.8% | 100% |
On the filed split through 2026-07-31, if each business keeps its last half-year's growth, the company grows about 11% next year and 11% in year 3, against 8.8% over the last twelve months. A scenario, not a forecast: no business holds its rate.
The results
The numbers
Sales grew 8.8% over the twelve months to Jul 2026, faster than the −1.4% in the year to Jan 2026.
Operating margin is −41%, up from −89% in the year to Jan 2024.
Running costs take 73¢ of each sales dollar, down from 132¢ in the year to Jan 2022.
Shareholders' money lost 10× a year, down from −77% in the year to Jan 2023.
It used $68.4M of cash over the last twelve months, so the $95.3M it holds lasts about 1.4 years at that pace.
It owes $142M more than the cash it holds, and its operations bring in no cash to repay it.
The share count rose 40% in 2.5 years, and pay in shares costs 12% of sales.
All the numbers
Filed figures from the company's 10-K and 10-Q, read 2026-10-04. Fiscal years end in January.
| Jan 2022 | Jan 2023 | Jan 2024 | Jan 2025 | Jan 2026 | 12 mo to Jul 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size and growth | ||||||
| Sales | $241M | $468M | $507M | $417M | $411M | $433M |
| Sales growth | +65% | +94% | +8.2% | −18% | −1.4% | +8.8% |
| Profit | ||||||
| Gross margin | 22% | 18% | 5.9% | 24% | 31% | 32% |
| Operating margin | −110% | −73% | −89% | −61% | −51% | −41% |
| Net margin | −55% | −74% | −90% | −66% | −54% | −41% |
| What growth costs, per sales dollar | ||||||
| Research and development | 60% | 42% | 44% | 34% | 34% | 32% |
| Sales and marketing | 38% | 30% | 30% | 31% | 24% | 22% |
| General and admin | 34% | 19% | 22% | 20% | 23% | 19% |
| Pay in shares | 28% | 20% | 23% | 18% | 16% | 12% |
| Capital spending | 6.8% | 4.0% | 3.8% | 2.9% | 1.0% | 0.9% |
| Cash | ||||||
| Cash from operations | −$157M | −$267M | −$329M | −$147M | −$62.8M | −$64.5M |
| Free cash flow | −$174M | −$286M | −$348M | −$159M | −$67.0M | −$68.4M |
| Balance sheet | ||||||
| Cash and short-term investments | $315M | $369M | $327M | $225M | $142M | $95.3M |
| Debt | $0 | $295M | $284M | $297M | $261M | $237M |
| Net cash | $315M | $74.2M | $43.7M | −$72.5M | −$119M | −$142M |
| Returns and shares | ||||||
| Shares (diluted) | - | - | 18.8M | 21.7M | 23.4M | 26.3M |
What growth costs
Each dollar of sales now carries far less cost than it did, but that came from cutting, not from growing: sales have shrunk while spending fell faster. The last time sales grew, costs per dollar rose. So the record does not yet show that growth itself makes ChargePoint more profitable.
The evidence under this - 2 claims
The fall came from cutting cost dollars, not from growth: R&D dollars fell from $220.8M in fiscal 2024 to $139.3M in fiscal 2026, so the cuts say nothing about what the next dollar of sales costs.
The last report (2 Sep)
Quarter ended July 2026, filed figures.
The second quarter of fiscal 2027, to 31 July, looked like a turn. Sales grew 17.7% to $116.1M and the operating loss narrowed to $34.1M from $59.0M.
Look closer and much of it was one-off. A tariff refund supplied 4 percentage points of the record 36% gross margin. Cash held up only because $40.7M of unsold equipment was sold off; without it, the half's cash outflow would have been $81.5M, not $40.8M. And the next quarter is guided to $105M to $115M, below this one.
What it did to the thesisIt weakened the turnaround story more than it helped. Growth was real, but the record margin and the steady cash leaned on a tariff refund and on selling off stock, both one-offs. A weaker forecast for the next quarter keeps the view Unattractive.
The quarter in detail
Sales growth from the previous quarter, filed figures.
Earnings per share $-1.35 against $-1.57 expected; $-1.35 as filed, with no adjustments.
The evidence under this - 9 claims
- The company has an interest in naming the one-off, because it makes the underlying margin look durable; the offsetting risk is that the tariffs which produced the refund also produced the cost, and neither side is separately disclosed
- Normalised 35% is up only 2 points year over year against the 5 points the headline shows, so most of the improvement a reader sees is the refund
- Selling inventory is ordinary trading, not a financing trick: the stock was bought with cash in earlier periods and converting it is the business working
- Payables and accrued liabilities used $22.3M in the same half, so the whole working-capital block released far less than the inventory line alone
- ChargePoint beat the top of its own range in each of the last two quarters, so the guide may be conservative rather than a forecast of decline
- The chief financial officer explained the step down as a home-charging bump around large retail sale days that is not expected to repeat, which is a stated reason rather than caution
What management did with the money
It paid no cash interest in the half. It issued $9.4M of new shares to its lenders instead, and the share count rose 10.4% in six months. A $150.0M facility to sell still more shares is registered and unused.
The evidence under this - 3 claims
The price, and where we disagree
In short. Full. It looks cheap for each dollar of sales, but the price assumes sales far above the company's own forecast, and a refinancing could leave today's owners with less.
The shares rose 75% on 3 September on 27 times the previous day's volume, and a quarter of the freely traded shares are sold short, so the price can swing on positioning alone.
Two dates matter more. On 14 November the right to pay interest in shares ends. On 3 December the next results show whether the margin holds once the refunds stop.
The evidence under this - 5 claims
- The company has an interest in naming the one-off, because it makes the underlying margin look durable; the offsetting risk is that the tariffs which produced the refund also produced the cost, and neither side is separately disclosed
- Normalised 35% is up only 2 points year over year against the 5 points the headline shows, so most of the improvement a reader sees is the refund
- Inventory has fallen from $214.9M to $179.5M and cannot fund the business indefinitely; each release makes the next one smaller
- She also said 'there are lots of puts and takes on the cash flow forecast, so it's difficult to say with certainty', which is the same executive declining to commit to the path
How we read the multiple
Counting its debt, the whole business sells for well under $1 for each $1 of a year's sales. That looks cheap for America's largest car-charging network, but it still loses money. To break even:
- Assume management's own goals: 35 cents kept from each sales dollar after the cost of the chargers, and quarterly running costs under $50M.
- Then it needs about $142.9M of sales a quarter.
- That is 29.9% more than the $110M it just forecast for next quarter.
Against its own history. Cheaper for each dollar of sales than its own recent normal, but the sales are guided lower and the owners are being diluted, so the discount is earned.
The evidence under this - 3 claims
- $69.1M of the debt is future interest capitalised into the carrying value rather than principal, so a reader who strikes net debt on principal alone gets a smaller figure and a cheaper ratio
- Against its own six-year median the multiple is far lower - the vendor puts prior-year median price-to-sales at 2.77 times - so the business is cheap against its own history, which was the history of a growing company
- The measure excludes stock-based compensation, so a reader who counts that cost needs materially more revenue still, and one who accepts management's adjustments needs less than a GAAP calculation would imply
- Adjusted EBITDA loss was already down to $4.8M, so on management's preferred measure the gap to breakeven is much smaller than this operating calculation suggests
- ChargePoint beat the top of its own range in each of the last two quarters, so the guide may be conservative rather than a forecast of decline
- The chief financial officer explained the step down as a home-charging bump around large retail sale days that is not expected to repeat, which is a stated reason rather than caution
Priced against its rivals
Only Blink Charging sells the same thing to the same buyers as a large part of what it does. Tesla does too, but as a small part of a much bigger company, so its price says little about this one. A price comparison needs at least two, so the price is judged against its own history instead.
Private or foreign rivals that cannot be priced: ABB Ltd., Alfen N.V., Alpitronic S.r.l., Kempower Oyj, Siemens AG, Ampeco Ltd., Driivz Ltd., EV Connect, Inc., Monta ApS.
Where we disagree with the market
The July quarter was the turn: a record margin, cash no longer draining and growth back, so the losses now end.
The improvement is real, but the quarter overstates it: three of its four best features were one-offs the company itself named.
The market took the chief executive at his word when he called the jump 'the beginning of the move'.
Against us: it has beaten the top of its own range twice running. Sales above $120M at a 35% margin, with cash flat and no equipment sold off, would prove the turn real.
What analysts say, and the evidence
The evidence under this - 6 claims
- The company has an interest in naming the one-off, because it makes the underlying margin look durable; the offsetting risk is that the tariffs which produced the refund also produced the cost, and neither side is separately disclosed
- Normalised 35% is up only 2 points year over year against the 5 points the headline shows, so most of the improvement a reader sees is the refund
- ChargePoint beat the top of its own range in each of the last two quarters, so the guide may be conservative rather than a forecast of decline
- The chief financial officer explained the step down as a home-charging bump around large retail sale days that is not expected to repeat, which is a stated reason rather than caution
What could go wrong, and how we would know
The risks
- Interest in cash from November. After 14 November the interest needs cash, a new deal or more shares.
- It owes more than it owns. Shareholders' stake on the books turned negative, at minus $36.1M, and the losses to date total $2.19B.
- A thin cash cushion. Cash fell from $142.0M to $95.7M in six months, against a lender's floor of $25.0M.
- A home market going backwards. North America is 82% of sales, and battery cars' share of new American sales is falling.
The evidence under this - 6 claims
What we still do not know
- Whether the right to pay interest in shares is extended past 14 November. Nothing filed says what happens next.
- How many subscribers renew each year. No renewal figure is published.
- How long selling off unsold equipment can keep funding the losses. Management expects it to continue, with $179.5M left.
The evidence under this - 3 claims
- Inventory has fallen from $214.9M to $179.5M and cannot fund the business indefinitely; each release makes the next one smaller
- She also said 'there are lots of puts and takes on the cash flow forecast, so it's difficult to say with certainty', which is the same executive declining to commit to the path
What would change our view
The objection is not the multiple and not the market - electric-vehicle charging is real and this is the largest network in America. It is that the route to profitability runs through a financing event, and a company paying its coupon in stock while revenue guidance falls is one whose recapitalisation would very likely come ahead of today's shareholders rather than for them. For THESE shares there is no path that does not start with them being diluted away; a lower price buys more of the same claim.
- Reopens the researchIt is recapitalised without the equity being wiped, and reaches breakeven
It needs all of:
- ○A refinancing ends paying interest in new shares without wiping out today's shareholders.watched as it happens
- ○Quarterly sales reach about $143M with the underlying margin above 35%, where its own cost promise ends the operating losses.checked at the next results, due by 3 Dec
We would also be wrong if
- Cash from operations turns positive in a quarter when unsold equipment is not being sold off.
- The share count grows less than 3% over the next twelve months.
What is coming
- 14 November 2026 Right to pay Senior Loan interest in shares ends: Whether interest turns to cash against $95.7M of cash and a $25.0M minimum, or the lenders extend share payment and the count keeps climbing.
Every dated event ahead
- 14 November 2026 Right to pay Senior Loan interest in shares ends: Whether interest turns to cash against $95.7M of cash and a $25.0M minimum, or the lenders extend share payment and the count keeps climbing.
- 3 December 2026 Q3 fiscal 2027 results: Revenue against the $105M to $115M guide, normalised gross margin near 35% once tariff refunds stop, and whether cash holds without inventory releases.
- March 2027 Fiscal 2027 results and the PRSU adjusted EBITDA test: Whether operating costs held below $50M a quarter and whether the EBITDA target the CEO's PRSUs ride on was met.
Since we wrote this
- 5 OctThesis reviewThe long case now sits under the verdictAfter the five-name pilot, the owner asked for the long case on every thesis.
- 4 OctThesis reviewOwner's checklist: revenue streams, cost of growth, management, catalystsThe owner's checklist found the method silent on who runs the company, what growth costs, where the money comes from and what is dated ahead; this pass fills those four blocks from the proxy and filings.
- 26 SepThesis reviewSigned deals traced to their sources; none has filed termsThe announced partnerships with RAW Charging, Mercedes-Benz, Optimus and Santa Monica appear in no filing. The name was archived on 17 September; that decision is now recorded.
- 8 SepThesis writtenUnattractive, medium convictionWritten days after one quarter sent the shares up 75% in a session, a quarter flattered by a tariff refund, an equipment sell-off and an interest holiday ending in November.
Sources 12
Sources - 12
Every claim above cites one of these, or states the reasoning that derived it. The quote is frozen at the date it was read: a link can rot, and an agent fetch returns a reading of a page rather than the page. Backs counts the whole claim ledger, so it can name a claim this page does not surface.
- S01primarycompany filing2026-04-02Item 1 business and competition - the eleven named competitors, the 385,000 active ports and 1,480,000 quarterly drivers, the statement that ChargePoint predominately does not own or operate stationsbacksC02C03C09C47C50C51C54C55
- S02primarycompany filing2026-09-04the debt note - the 2025 Senior Loan's troubled-debt-restructuring accounting, the January 2030 maturity, the $25.0M liquidity covenant, the $143.7M fair value, and the Interest Shares election expiring 14 November 2026; the share-count roll-forward; remaining performance obligations; the $150.0M unused at-the-market facility; the liquidity statementbacksC23C24C25C26C27C29C30C35C40C42C43C47C48C54C55
- S03primarycompany release2026-09-02the statements - revenue by line, the 4 percentage point tariff benefit disclosed in the gross margin, the balance sheet showing negative equity, the six-month cash flow statement, and the Q3 guidance rangebacksC01C13C14C16C17C18C19C22C28C31C32C48
- S04primarytranscript2026-09-02ChargePoint Q2 fiscal 2027 earnings call transcriptmanagement's answers - the CFO's $4.2M refund figure and 35% normalized margin, the statement that inventory funded the quarter, the sub-$50M cost target, the hardware and subscription margins, the operating KPIs; and the analyst questions from Oppenheimer, RBC, Needham, TD Cowen and ROTH that produced them
The 600-plus kilowatt capability is the best in the world, and it creates a value proposition that our competitors simply cannot match today. … we got a refund this quarter and majority of that which is about $4.2 million was reflected in Q2's numbers as a onetime reduction to cost of goods sold. … If you take that $4 million out, they were 35% on a normalized basis. … inventory came down and funded our EBITDA loss, our capital expenses or other working capital requirements resulting in essentially 0 cash usage.
backsC05C07C12C15C21C31C32C33C44C48C49 - S05secondaryvendor data2026-09-08Research pack (frozen at content/CHPT/research-pack.json)the market tier - price and the 2026-09-03 session, market value, the analyst split, FINRA short interest at the 2026-08-14 settlement, insider Form 4 transaction codes, the trailing revenue that reconciles to the filingsbacksC35C36C37C38C39C43
- S06primarycompany filing2026-03-31a competitor's own account of the market - the dimensions competition is decided on, including 'the installed base's size'; ChargePoint named first among notable US competitors; and non-networked 'basic' chargers named as a low-cost substitutebacksC04C08C09
- S07primarycompany release2025-04-24the buyer's own record that a private rival's 600 kW product was bought and rolling out from the second half of 2025 - dating the threat against ChargePoint's September 2026 demonstration
IONITY will be the first charge point operator (CPO) to procure the newly unveiled HYC1000 chargers from Alpitronic … a single vehicle charging at up to 600 kW … IONITY plans to roll-out these state-of-the-art chargers across its network in the second half of 2025
backsC06 - S08primarygovernment data2026-07-27the driver's rate measured outside the industry, in the market that is 82% of ChargePoint's revenue, and the date both federal EV tax credits expired
Battery electric vehicle sales fell to 6% of new vehicle sales in the first six months of 2026, down from 7% over the same period last year. … Two tax credits for purchasing or leasing new electric vehicles both expired on September 30, 2025. … Hybrid electric vehicles continued to gain market share, reaching a record 16% of light-duty vehicle sales.
backsC11 - S09primarygovernment data2023-06-13Joint Office of Energy and Transportation / NREL - The 2030 National Charging Network Joint Office of Energy and Transportationthe size of the prize counted in ports by a national laboratory rather than by the industry: 1.2 million public and 26.8 million private ports to support 30-42 million light-duty EVs by 2030
182,000 publicly accessible fast charging ports-to enable long-distance travel and ride-hailing electrification … 1 million Level 2 charging ports at publicly accessible locations-in high-density neighborhoods, office buildings, and retail outlets … 26.8 million Level 1 and Level 2 charging ports at privately accessible locations-largely homes, multifamily properties, and workplaces
backsC10 - S10primarycompany release2026-03-04the full year the rally is measured against - revenue down 1%, hardware down 8%, the chief executive calling fiscal 2026 'an important inflection point', the Q1 fiscal 2027 guidance range that was later beaten, and the RAW Charging commitmentbacksC32C41C47
- S11primarycompany release2026-06-03the quarter before the rally - revenue $101.8M up 4%, non-GAAP gross margin 32%, non-GAAP operating expenses $54.4M, cash $95.8M; the Express Solo launch claim of up to 600 kW to a single port, dated June 2026; and the OBE Power multifamily deploymentbacksC07C45C46
- S12primarycompany filing2026-05-28beneficial ownership as of April 30, 2026, the executive officers and their tenure, the fiscal 2026 bonus and PRSU design on adjusted EBITDA and the nil fiscal 2026 bonusbacksC51C52C53