Question Bank › The product is disappearing into reorder rhythm

The product is disappearing into reorder rhythm

The product is disappearing into reorder rhythm: revenue is shifting from won-each-time to arriving-on-its-own, and the

Calls Tested
500
Answered YES
5
Hit Rate
1%
rare by design

iRhythm Technologies, Inc. (IRTC) — this company's answers

NO on the Q1 2022 call 2022-05-07 C+
The model's full reasoning — Q1 2022 call → NOWe need answer only YES or NO. Need analyze transcript. Question asks: Does management describe that a growing share of company's revenue now arrives without a new selling event — through reorders, refills, renewals, repeat purchases, usage-driven billing, aftermarket or consumable pull-through, or customers' own standing routines — AND that this self-arriving share has recently and visibly grown as a proportion of business, with management grounding shift in observed current behavior and treating it as changing quality of revenue? We need use only transcript. Need determine if management describes such. iRhythm is ambulatory cardiac monitoring service. Revenue likely from Zio XT patches, service. They sell monitoring service, each test prescribed. Not exactly recurring revenue? They have "registrations" and "new accounts" and "home enrollment". They talk about new account openings, new store same-store mix. "New store, defined as accounts that have been opened for less than 12 months, accounted for 55% of our year-over-year unit growth, up from 46% in Q4 2021." That implies existing accounts (more than 12 months) accounted for 45% of growth, down from 54%? Actually new store accounted for 55% of year-over-year unit growth, up from 46% in Q4. So existing accounts contributed less? Wait if new store share of growth increased, then existing store share decreased. That suggests growth is more from new accounts, not less dependent on winning each sale. But question asks self-arriving revenue from reorders etc. Management doesn't describe reorder rates or repeat purchases. They mention "registrations rebounded", "new account openings", "home enrollment". No mention of recurring revenue or installed base compounding. They talk about "core market" and "new accounts". They mention "Zio monitor" next-gen, international expansion. No discussion of revenue arriving without selling event. So answer NO. Need ensure no hidden. They mention "home enrollment" maybe patients enroll at home? Not self-arriving revenue. They mention "new store same-store mix" but that's about growth contribution. No. Thus answer NO.

← Back to the full IRTC analysis

Show the exact prompt the model was given
Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management describe that a GROWING SHARE OF THE COMPANY'S REVENUE NOW ARRIVES WITHOUT A NEW SELLING EVENT — through reorders, refills, renewals, repeat purchases, usage-driven billing, aftermarket or consumable pull-through, or customers' own standing routines — AND that this self-arriving share has RECENTLY AND VISIBLY GROWN as a proportion of the business, with management grounding the shift in observed current behavior and treating it as changing the company's quality of revenue? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent recent shift with both halves present: (1) SELF-ARRIVING REVENUE, OBSERVED NOW: management points to real, current repeat-mechanism revenue — reorder rates, renewal behavior, consumable or aftermarket attach, usage growth from installed product, or customers reordering on their own schedule — described with concrete grounding in the recent period, not asserted through generic 'recurring revenue' or 'loyal customers' language; and (2) THE PROPORTION HAS RECENTLY MOVED: management conveys that this self-arriving component is a visibly LARGER share of the business than it recently was — through an installed base that has recently scaled, a consumable or service stream now compounding on top of equipment already placed, or repeat behavior recently strengthening — so the company's revenue is becoming progressively less dependent on winning each sale, with the mix still early in its shift. Answer NO if the business has always been overwhelmingly recurring or contractual with nothing recently shifted. NO if repeat language is boilerplate with no observed behavior or recent change. NO if the repeat revenue is forced by contract lock-in with no customer choice described. NO if the shift is only planned or hoped for. NO if the pattern rests on one anecdote, or appears only in an analyst's question management does not affirm. Use only the supplied transcript. Answer only YES or NO.

Companies that answered YES

TickerCompanyCallDateCall grade
DUOT Duos Technologies Group, Inc. Q4 2023 2024-04-01 F
QTRX Quanterix Corporation Q3 2023 2023-11-07 B
CYBR CyberArk Software Ltd. Q3 2021 2021-11-04 B+
IRBT iRobot Corporation Q3 2021 2021-10-28 D
TOUR Tuniu Corporation Q4 2017 2018-03-14 D

How the model reasoned

DUOT · Q4 2023 → YESThe question is about whether management describes a growing share of revenue arriving without a new selling event, through reorders, renewals, etc., and that this has recently and visibly grown as a ...
QTRX · Q3 2023 → YESThe question is about whether management describes a growing share of revenue arriving without a new selling event, like through reorders, consumables, etc., and that this share has recently grown.
CYBR · Q3 2021 → YESThe question is about whether management describes a growing share of revenue arriving without a new selling event, like through renewals, and that this has recently grown as a proportion.

More from the question bank

Named catch-up gapWorking for customers it could not have servPaid to expand: the company's growth spendinVolume records through a still-fixed gateRecently unlocked doorSelling something whose payoff to the buyer All questions →
Not investment advice. Artul.ai publishes AI-generated earnings-call quality grades and expected-volatility estimates — never buy or sell recommendations. We tested over 1,600 predictive hypotheses against 165,000 transcripts; the honest result, including what failed, is documented in our methodology.