Start 30 days free, no card. Full Pro access for a month, then decide. Start free

Back to analysts list

Analyst

Tyler DuPont

Wells Fargo · covers Technology

Period: Reporting periods mapped to calendar 2025 Q3 – 2026 Q2 (4 quarters; questions recorded in 3).

Limited coverage. Only 5 questions of coverage. Treat these numbers as directional — sample too small for reliable averages.
Questions
5on tracked calls
Challenge rate
0%none of 5 questionsLimited sample
Companies
2questioned at least once
Reporting periods
3with questions

These figures cover the whole profile: every tracked question, all reporting periods.

How to read these numbers

Challenge rate is the share of questions that pushed back, pressed for specifics or questioned management’s assumptions. It describes how questions were asked on the calls tracked here; it does not measure whether any view turned out to be right.

Rounding. Rates are rounded to whole percentages, so a small share can show as 0% even when some questions were challenging. The count beside each rate is exact; “none of N questions” means no question was challenging.

No questions recorded. “—” means there is nothing to calculate: no questions were recorded for that period on the calls tracked here. It does not mean there was no activity.

Fewer than 3 questions. A company-level rate is withheld when fewer than 3 questions were recorded for that company; the questions are still counted everywhere else.

Small samples. Profiles with fewer than 10 questions are marked Limited sample.

Reporting periods. Questions are grouped by the calendar quarter each company’s fiscal reporting period maps to, not by the date of the call. Periods without a calendar mapping are listed separately under their fiscal label.

Questions asked

Grouped by company, most questions first. Open a company to read its questions, newest reporting period first.

Showing 5 of 5 questions from 2 companies

JKHYJack Henry & Associates3 questions · 2 reporting periods · 0 of 3 challenging
JKHY company page →

Calendar 2026 Q1

how should we be thinking about upside to that 50 to 55 annual target

DemandCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2026 Q3 →
Show response

Greg expects north of 55 wins. Recently won an almost $10 billion client with 1.2 million accounts, 25% larger than any current customer. Larger deals take longer to close. Pipelines extremely strong across core, payments and complementary. Sales team executing at highest level.

The $122 million in the quarter was pretty meaningfully above, it looks like both consensus and even your own historical trends

Capital AllocationGuidance ReliabilityTranscript · FY2026 Q3 →
Show response

Mimi attributed strong FCF to operational foundation, tax legislation clarity, and small asset sales. Year-to-date trailing 12-month FCF at $108-109M. Raised full-year FCF conversion to 95-105% with bias to high side. Returning to historical norm levels.

Calendar 2025 Q3

from an asset size perspective, could you maybe clarify the average size of the wins you're seeing in the quarter

DemandCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2026 Q1 →
Show response

Greg confirmed 4 Q1 core wins including one multibillion-dollar deal, consistent with expectations for a light Q1. On track to match or exceed last year's 16 multibillion and 4 over $5B wins based on pipeline.

EPAMEPAM Systems2 questions · 1 reporting period · 0 of 2 challenging
EPAM company page →

Calendar 2026 Q2

how much of this updated outlook is due to your current go-to-market capability set

DemandCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Fejes said it is both: SaaS/Hi-Tech clients shifting spend to tokens and GPUs EPAM does not sell, while the rest of the base needs stronger business-development capability to sell AI-native work.

an update on the pricing environment right now would be pretty helpful.

PricingCompetitive DynamicsTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Peterson reported price improvement earlier in the year and ongoing vendor consolidation, framing agentic managed services as incremental revenue rather than a price haircut unlike some peers.

Challenge rate by company

Every company this analyst questioned, most questions first. A company-level rate is shown from 3 questions; below that it is withheld.

CompanyQuestionsChallenge rate
JKHY Jack Henry & Associates30%none of 3 questions
EPAM EPAM Systems2—Rate withheld: fewer than 3 questions
  • JKHY
    Jack Henry & Associates · 3 questions
    0%none of 3 questions
  • EPAM
    EPAM Systems · 2 questions
    —rate withheld: under 3 questions

Activity by reporting period

Questions recorded for each calendar quarter that companies’ reporting periods map to (not the call date), with the challenge rate for that period. Periods inside the range with no questions are shown as “No questions recorded”.

Questions by calendar reporting period
Calendar periodQuestionsChallenge rateCompanies
2025 Q310%none of 1 question1
2025 Q4No questions recorded——
2026 Q120%none of 2 questions1
2026 Q220%none of 2 questions1
  1. 2025 Q31 question · challenge rate 0% (none of 1 question) · 1 company
  2. 2025 Q4No questions recorded
  3. 2026 Q12 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 1 company
  4. 2026 Q22 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 1 company

Topics

Topics tagged on this analyst’s questions.

  • Competitive Dynamics4
  • Demand3
  • Capital Allocation1
  • Guidance Reliability1
  • Pricing1