Worth reading
52Recurring
0–100. This measures how worthwhile something is to read, not how good or bad the company is.Direction
Mixed performance
Direction inferred from the company’s description.Scale
—
Displayed only when the document provides numerical figures.Wording
Conditional
How definitive the wording is.Contents of this document
Summary of Q&AQ3 FY20269 items taken from the company’s own explanation
Financial Results Figures (The key points of this material are explained below)
Gross Profit MarginOMR is approximately 10 percentage points higher than PMR. Company-wide gross margin: Not disclosed
Results for the three months of the current quarterThe staffing business returned to quarterly profitability in Q3
What the company explained in this material
Self-assessment against the planThe company's self-assessment against its own plan.
Q3 performance was challenging relative to plan. The number of companies contracted with the Alumnia recruitment service was approximately 130% of plan, but revenue was behind the plan for the current fiscal yearKey points of the Q&AKey questions raised by investors at the briefing and the company's answers
RPO's earnings structure, differences between PMR and OMR and their profitability, the impact of OMR on advertising budgets, the outlook for the PMR market, factors behind the Q3 shortfall against plan, progress in the Alumnia recruitment service, and earnings improvement in the staffing businessBreakdown of Factors Affecting the ChangeReasons cited by the Company for the change in the figures.
Decline in PMR, impact of exceptional demand, revenue shortfall, delays in M&A progress, higher staffing rates, and focus on more profitable projects
Assumptions Underlying the Business OutlookThe assumptions used by the company in preparing its forecast.
PMR is expected to remain in the range of 0% to approximately negative 10% year on year for the time beingNew initiatives
Capital and business alliance with HATALUCK, integration of Alumnia functionality into its app, post-hiring retention support and proposals for Alumnia, and use of AI in OMRKey KPIsA metric the company considers important as a management benchmark.
Number of RPO client companies: up 5.9% year on year; OMR referral efficiency: 2.0 times that of PMR; PMR revenue decline: approximately 20% in Q1 and 9.1% in Q3; OMR revenue: up 20.2% year on year; staffing revenue: up 16.1% year on year; number of companies contracted with the Alumnia recruitment service: approximately 130% of plan; customers achieving higher staffing rates: approximately 30%Unit price and quantity metricsThese figures show sales broken down by price and volume.
Higher staffing rates, number of RPO client companies, OMR referral efficiency, and the relationship between hiring numbers and advertising expensesSegment results
RPO services: Revenue was below the previous year. Staffing business: Revenue increased 16.1% year on year. PMR: Q3 revenue decreased 9.1% year on year. OMR: Revenue increased 20.2% year on yearMarket Size / Share
The paid job advertising market is trending downward. Market share: Not disclosed| Item | Details |
|---|---|
| Document type | Summary of Q&A |
| Fiscal Period Covered | Q3 FY2026 |
| Gross Profit Margin | OMR is approximately 10 percentage points higher than PMR. Company-wide gross margin: Not disclosed |
| Results for the three months of the current quarter | The staffing business returned to quarterly profitability in Q3 |
| Self-assessment against the plan | Q3 performance was challenging relative to plan. The number of companies contracted with the Alumnia recruitment service was approximately 130% of plan, but revenue was behind the plan for the current fiscal year |
| Segment results | RPO services: Revenue was below the previous year. Staffing business: Revenue increased 16.1% year on year. PMR: Q3 revenue decreased 9.1% year on year. OMR: Revenue increased 20.2% year on year |
| Breakdown of Factors Affecting the Change | Decline in PMR, impact of exceptional demand, revenue shortfall, delays in M&A progress, higher staffing rates, and focus on more profitable projects |
| Key KPIs | Number of RPO client companies: up 5.9% year on year; OMR referral efficiency: 2.0 times that of PMR; PMR revenue decline: approximately 20% in Q1 and 9.1% in Q3; OMR revenue: up 20.2% year on year; staffing revenue: up 16.1% year on year; number of companies contracted with the Alumnia recruitment service: approximately 130% of plan; customers achieving higher staffing rates: approximately 30% |
| Unit price and quantity metrics | Higher staffing rates, number of RPO client companies, OMR referral efficiency, and the relationship between hiring numbers and advertising expenses |
| Assumptions Underlying the Business Outlook | PMR is expected to remain in the range of 0% to approximately negative 10% year on year for the time being |
| Market Size / Share | The paid job advertising market is trending downward. Market share: Not disclosed |
| Key points of the Q&A | RPO's earnings structure, differences between PMR and OMR and their profitability, the impact of OMR on advertising budgets, the outlook for the PMR market, factors behind the Q3 shortfall against plan, progress in the Alumnia recruitment service, and earnings improvement in the staffing business |
| New initiatives | Capital and business alliance with HATALUCK, integration of Alumnia functionality into its app, post-hiring retention support and proposals for Alumnia, and use of AI in OMR |
Items this document does not state (18)
Net SalesOperating profitOrdinary incomeNet incomeOperating profit marginSelling, general and administrative expensesFull-year earnings forecastProgress against full-year forecastNumber of stores and locationsNumber of employeesRisk amount incorporated into the outlookMedium-term management plan targetsFinancial targetsAnnual DividendPayout ratioAcquisition of treasury sharesCapital expendituresOrders received and order backlog
These are items the company does not state in this document. We do not leave them blank, nor fill them in from other sources or by inference.
The reasons the company gives
The company's own explanation, not something inferred from the numbers.The company cited the decline in PMR, the impact of exceptional demand, the revenue shortfall, and delays in M&A progress as the main reasons conditions had become challenging relative to plan. It explained that the expansion of OMR, higher staffing rates, and a focus on projects after price revisions were factors contributing to improvement.
How to read this page
This is not the documentKomori reads the disclosure the company filed and writes this summary. Figures are as stated by the company and are not audited.
Weight is not a verdictIt measures how much this changes what the company had already told the market. It is not a view on the shares.
Corrections happenIf the company reissues this disclosure, the page is rebuilt from the corrected version and the revision number moves up.