CCLD · Technology · $94.2M mkt cap · FY2025 filings · · not refreshed in 39 days · Shallow moat ·
On the watchlist
2022–2025 (latest 4 aligned FYs; v3 window cap 5): revenue $139M to $120M, decreasing; diluted EPS -0.67 to 0.10, increasing. Latest-filed diluted EPS remains usable for Business Trend, but an integer share-count change lacks enough evidence to confirm a comparable EPS basis; valuation growth therefore stays at 0%.
Not enough years of gross-margin data to score pricing power.
Median ROIC -3.9%, above the 12% hurdle in 20% of years.
Net debt/EBITDA 0.0x, no material interest expense disclosed.
Owner earnings changed trend unclear over up to the ten most recent annual observations, share count n/a.
The pricingPower component abstained: Not enough years of gross-margin data to score pricing power. The other four 20% weights were renormalized over the scored 80%.
A cautious baseline, not a price target: what the shares may support if normalized owner earnings simply hold steady.
A discount this large is often a warning rather than a bargain — the market may expect earnings to keep falling. See the revenue trend above.
What today’s price assumes: owner earnings shrinking ~10%/yr over 5 years. The estimate assumes owner earnings stay flat (0% growth).
We solve for the constant annual change in owner earnings that would make the five-year zero-growth estimate equal today’s price. This keeps the existing model inputs and calculation unchanged; it is an expectations lens, not a forecast.
This zero-growth estimate assumes trailing owner earnings persist — unreliable for declining businesses. The recent FY revenue series does not trigger the three-consecutive-declines flag.
Among the current top-score group, the median current price is 239% above the zero-growth estimate across 48 of the current top 50 companies by Moat Score with both values.
Score records captured Jul 26, 2026.
FTNT, META, MEDP, IBEX, MSFT, GOOGL, LULU, ANF, IDXX, TXRH, FHI, QLYS, FFIV, ADBE, LLY, MANH, VEEV, GRMN, SSD, MNST, DOCS, MCO, CPRT, NTAP, LRCX, NVDA, CORT, SFM, MPTI, ULTA, SN, RMD, ROL, PAYC, IRMD, INTU, DECK, MORN, LGCY, DAL, GWW, ISRG, MPWR, CTAS, LOPE, MRK, CMG, FAST, BKNG, ORLY
Missing a usable price or zero-growth estimate: ANF, BKNG.
Model details under moat-index@3.0.0: zero-growth multiple 11.1×, capped-growth comparison at no more than 18×; 9% discount rate; high-end growth 0% (capped at 4%) using min(5y revenue CAGR, 5y diluted-EPS CAGR), clamped to 0%–4%; maintenance capex uses min(capex, D&A); abstain when D&A is unavailable. This is a disclosed model range, not intrinsic value as fact.
Across the filed record, revenue grew from $10.5M (FY2013) to $120M (FY2025) — about 22.6% a year compounded over 12 years.
It earned 18.4% on invested capital in the latest filed year, FY2025. Across the full 12-year measurable filed record, median ROIC was −8.1%. Over the v3 recent window (10 measurable filed years), median ROIC was −3.9%. The Returns on Capital filter above scores it 7/100.
The balance sheet carried $1.2M of total debt in FY2025 against $21M of owner earnings — roughly 0.1 years of owner earnings to retire it all. Balance-Sheet Safety scores it 99/100.
This breakdown is generated from the filed numbers and sub-scores above — no outside narrative, no estimates. Where a filing doesn’t disclose an input, the sentence that would need it is omitted instead of guessed.
Not disclosed in CCLD’s filings for these years — we don’t estimate it.
Gaps in a line mean that item isn’t in CCLD’s filings for that year. The series is never interpolated or estimated. The Table view lists every filed value, including operating and net margins, total debt, and share count.
Flagship explainer
CareCloud, Inc.'s filing does not supply enough comparable lines for a truthful flow chart — here's what is filed:
| Filed line | Value | % of revenue | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| $120M | 100% |
| |
| $11.3M | 9% |
| |
| Income before tax | $11M | 9% |
|
| Income tax | $199000 | 0% |
|
| $10.8M | 9% |
|
Flagship explainer
CareCloud, Inc.'s filing tags don't support a full breakdown — here's what is filed:
| Filed line | Value | % of assets | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total assets | $87.6M | 100% |
|
| $1.2M | 1% |
| |
| Stockholders’ equity | $59.5M | 68% |
|
Flagship explainer
ROE is five filed business factors multiplied together.
| Input | Value | Fiscal year | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10.8M | FY2025 |
| |
| Income before tax | $11M | FY2025 |
|
| Operating income | $11.3M | FY2025 |
|
| $120M | FY2025 |
| |
| Ending assets | $87.6M | FY2025 |
|
| Beginning assets | $71.6M | FY2024 |
|
| $59.5M | FY2025 |
| |
| $49.8M | FY2024 |
|
Flagship explainer
CareCloud, Inc.’s filing does not supply enough provenance-matched cash-flow lines for a truthful flow chart — here’s what is filed:
| Filed line | Value | % of cash from operations | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cash from operations | $28.6M | 100% |
|
| Depreciation and amortization | $15M | 52% |
|
Curated 19-manager tier
Delayed public 13F reports for 2026-Q2—not live positions, trades, or recommendations.
0 holding0 exited0 not holding0/19 resolved19 not retrieved
| Manager | Reported position | Quarter-over-quarter | Filing accession |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abrams Capital | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Akre Capital | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Baupost Group | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Berkshire Hathaway | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Brave Warrior Advisors | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Dodge & Cox | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| First Eagle | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Fundsmith | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Gardner Russo & Quinn | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Gates Foundation Trust | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Mairs & Power | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Markel / Markel-Gayner | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Oakmark / Harris Associates | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Pershing Square | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Polen Capital | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Sequoia / Ruane Cunniff | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Southeastern Asset Management | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Tweedy, Browne | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
| Yacktman Asset Management | Not retrieved | Comparison not retrieved | Filing not retrieved |
Position size uses shares and filed value from each manager’s 13F. Portfolio weight uses the eligible long-share filing denominator. Changes compare only with the immediately preceding calendar quarter.
Flagship explainer
We could not retrieve insider activity for this rendering; no zero-activity claim is shown.
Unavailable: Form 4 activity could not be retrieved for this rendering.
Breaks in the line mark methodology or normalizer upgrades — readings across versions aren’t compared, so a level shift there isn’t a change in the business.
Tier changesSame-methodology and same-normalizer crossings of the Wide / Narrow / Shallow bars
Scores are logged append-only and never overwritten — this record cannot be reconstructed retroactively, which is exactly why it’s worth keeping.
Form 4 reports mix P/S market or private transactions with compensation-plan mechanics. Activity casually described as “insider selling” can include compensation mechanics; awards, tax withholding, and option exercises are shown by their exact filed class here, never collapsed into “Bought” or “Sold.”
These are disclosed filing facts and arithmetic aggregates, not a signal or verdict.
The insider-filing service is temporarily unavailable, so no partial or guessed answer is shown for CCLD.
How CareCloud, Inc.’s moat rated in each of the years we can reconstruct from its filings — scored only on what was knowable at the time — and what its price and returns did afterward. The score never saw a price; the two are joined only in hindsight, for education, not as a signal.
How to read this: each dot is what the engine would have scored CCLD on that December 31; the line below is its total-return price path (dividends reinvested) in the years since.
Two tracks, one timeline: the score has its own 0–100 scale (top), the price its own 100-based scale (bottom) — never a shared axis. The price path is a total-return (dividends reinvested) index built from the same data the forward returns use; gaps in the score line are years with no reconstructed rating (see the table for why). The Table view carries every value.
In the reconstructed history shown, CCLD did not rate Wide-moat in any year, so there is no wide-moat track record to report. That absence is itself the honest answer — we don’t manufacture a comparison where the rating never earned one.
#358 of 744 scored Technology companies, ranked by Moat Score.
Compare CCLD with its nearest peers →All Technology companies on the Index →