How do we break down the same tags that appears on the same statement?

[Casey Mackinnon]

I am currently looking into using Arelle to extract information from the financial statements. I am using "--factTable=FACTTABLEFILE" command line argument to extract the information from there. However, I noticed that when there are the same tags appearing in the same statement, it only picks up one of the values.

Apologies if this is a trivial question but I am just getting started with Arelle.

For example, the screenshot I uploaded has three different lines of revenue items, where the first two add up to the third but all share the same tag "us-gaap:RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTax". The extracted information from Arelle only shows the "Total net sales" and not the above two that add up to it. 

Is there a way to get all of the numbers from here that break down the "us-gaap:RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTax" tag? 

Additionally, I am also looking at the retained earnings of AAPL and having trouble parsing that too. I am unable to extract it in the same order and format as the way it is shown in the 10-K. In fact, the retained earnings fact I am interested in is not even showing up on the extracted file.  

I hope this question makes sense and any help will be greatly appreciated!

[Austin Matherne]

Hi,

Regarding the revenues example, the three facts share a common primary item concept (us-gaap:RevenueFromContractWithCustomerExcludingAssessedTax), but are differentiated through the use of dimensional tagging (us-gaap:ServiceMember and us-gaap:ProductMember). Dimensions are represented by columns in the fact table view in Arelle (period and dates are just another XBRL dimension). If you continue scrolling right I expect you will find columns for the two members with the values you're looking for.

I'm not sure if I understand which fact value you're looking for in your second question, but the fact table is built off of the presentation linkbase submitted by the filer, not the order and presentation of the HTML content. The presentation linkbase often, but doesn't always match up with the presentation of the HTML report.

Kind regards,

Austin Matherne

[Casey Mackinnon]

Hi Austin,

I appreciate your response. It makes sense with the dimensions. I'd like to ask some follow-up questions regarding the same topic.

1. With the second question I asked, from the "AAPL retained earnings" photo, I was wondering how I can identify that the "us-gaap:StockholdersEquity" of -214 is the sum of the 5 fields above combined. (-3068+96995-14996-2099-77046)? All of the 6 fields including -214 are under the same axis and member but I am struggling to find out how we can extract the way these numbers are being calculated.

2. This is a similar thing I came across with ORCL. In the "ORCL Revenue Breakdown" attached, I see that the "Total Revenues" field is a sum of the 4 different revenue breakdowns above it. However, when looking at the linkRelationshipSet, all 5 fields including the "Total Revenues" are grouped under "us-gaap:RevenuesAbstract". Is there a way to identify that that even though they share the same "from" tag, the "Total Revenues" is a sum of the other 4 fields above?

3. On a separate note, I see that sometimes when I download the XBRL zip file, it does not contain the likes of pre, cal, lab, etc files. Are we still able to extract the information as effectively without them?

Apologies for the long follow-up but I appreciate your help.

Casey

[Austin Matherne]

Hi Casey,

1 & 2: To identify summation relationships, you should refer to the calculation linkbase (using the `--cal=CALFILE` argument). The fact table and presentation linkbase do not provide information about summation relationships.

3: The presentation, calculation, definition, and label linkbase files can sometimes be embedded directly within the schema (.xsd). This is an implementation detail and does not affect what data is available to the processor. Additionally, these files are typically present for reports with "extension taxonomies" (filer-defined concepts and relationships). However, in some jurisdictions where extensions are not supported, all reports use a common base taxonomy and the report isn't packaged with any of these files.

I hope this clarifies your questions.

Kind regards,  
Austin Matherne

[Casey Mackinnon]

That makes a lot of sense. Really appreciate your help!