Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. (ASM)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9. Beneish M-Score of -0.03 exceeds the -2.22 academic threshold — earnings quality may warrant further review.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedAvino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. exhibits a robust fundamental profile driven primarily by exceptional profitability rather than operational velocity or leverage. The company generates an ROIC of 12.9%, indicating capital efficiency that likely exceeds its cost of equity, while the DuPont decomposition reveals earnings power is anchored in a commanding net margin of 28.9% and gross margin of 52.6%. This high-margin engine operates on modest asset turnover of 0.33x with minimal leverage at an equity multiplier of 1.19x, suggesting growth is fueled by operational pricing or cost discipline rather than balance sheet expansion. Quality indicators reinforce this stability; a Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 signals strong financial health and momentum, while a Beneish M-Score of -0.03 points to low earnings manipulation risk.
Despite these fundamental strengths, the current valuation metrics present a significant divergence from historical norms and sector peers. The stock trades at a P/E multiple substantially below the basic materials sector average of 37.1x, yet this discount appears inconsistent with its superior margin profile relative to industry standards. A DCF analysis suggests a fair value of $1, which implies that current market pricing assumes limited future growth or incorporates specific idiosyncratic risks not captured in standard cash flow models. This disconnect between the company's high revenue growth rate of 39.4% and its depressed multiple indicates the market may be pricing in execution hurdles or sector-wide headwinds rather than reflecting intrinsic value based on current profitability metrics.
The risk-reward landscape is further complicated by divergent signals regarding insider confidence versus fundamental quality. While the Piotroski score suggests a improving financial trajectory, net insider selling totaling $6,773,132 over the last 90 days introduces potential concerns about management's outlook on near-term prospects or capital allocation priorities. This insider activity contrasts sharply with the company's strong operational metrics and low manipulation risk, creating an ambiguous picture where high-quality fundamentals coexist with a lack of internal stakeholder conviction. Investors must weigh whether this selling represents a strategic shift in portfolio concentration or signals hidden risks not yet apparent in the earnings quality data.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $1 | $1 | $1 |
| 3% | $1 | $1 | $1 |
| 4% | $1 | $1 | $1 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $1 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition
Breaking down Return on Equity to see how the company generates its ROE — efficiency, margins, or leverage.
Balance Sheet Health
Insider Activity (Last 90 Days)
Open-market buys vs sells by company insiders. Source: yfinance.
Earnings Surprise History
EPS estimates vs actuals for the most recent reported quarters. Source: yfinance.
Underwater (Drawdown from Peak)
How far below the all-time high the price has been over time. Deeper = more pain for holders.
Rolling 60-Day Beta vs S&P 500 (VOO)
How the stock's sensitivity to market moves changes over time. β > 1 = more volatile than the market.
Fundamentals
Passive Flow Attribution
ETF Draft EffectWhen investors buy or sell ETFs like VGK or VEA, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell ASM shares regardless of Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd.'s individual fundamentals. We estimate $1.3B of passive capital is structurally linked to ASM through 8 tracked ETFs. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption cycles can create noticeable volume spikes unrelated to company news.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 8 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. (ASM) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (2330) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with ASM. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 11 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
ASM Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest ASM Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 11 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
ASM Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
Avino Silver & Gold Mines Ltd. converts 3% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a low conversion rate suggesting heavy reinvestment. This may indicate a growth phase (building capacity) or structural capital intensity. The 97% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion.
Capital efficiency = Free Cash Flow ÷ EBITDA. Reinvestment = (EBITDA − FCF) ÷ EBITDA. Metrics from latest annual filings. Not investment advice.
Fails-to-Deliver (FTD) History
SEC-reported settlement failures. Elevated FTDs can indicate high short-selling pressure, operational settlement issues, or naked shorting activity.
| Date | Failed Shares | Close Price | Notional Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 85,246 | $7.83 | $667,476.18 |
| 2026-05-13 | 18,397 | $7.97 | $146,624.09 |
| 2026-05-12 | 190,129 | $7.52 | $1.4M |
| 2026-05-11 | 61,658 | $6.90 | $425,440.2 |
| 2026-05-08 | 28,243 | $6.86 | $193,746.98 |
| 2026-05-07 | 1,917 | $6.81 | $13,054.77 |
| 2026-05-06 | 828 | $6.22 | $5,150.16 |
| 2026-05-04 | 6,701 | $6.58 | $44,092.58 |
| 2026-04-30 | 126,367 | $6.23 | $787,266.41 |
| 2026-04-28 | 15,724 | $6.78 | $106,608.72 |
| 2026-04-22 | 10,321 | $6.99 | $72,143.79 |
| 2026-04-21 | 17,228 | $7.60 | $130,932.8 |
| 2026-04-20 | 11,833 | $7.75 | $91,705.75 |
| 2026-04-17 | 21,525 | $7.20 | $154,980 |
| 2026-04-15 | 12,788 | $7.23 | $92,457.24 |
| 2026-04-14 | 32,602 | $6.91 | $225,279.82 |
| 2026-04-13 | 4,823 | $7.04 | $33,953.92 |
| 2026-04-08 | 4,092 | $6.73 | $27,539.16 |
| 2026-04-07 | 537 | $6.77 | $3,635.49 |
| 2026-04-06 | 160 | $6.53 | $1,044.8 |
| 2026-04-02 | 200 | $6.59 | $1,318 |
| 2026-04-01 | 24,230 | $6.32 | $153,133.6 |
| 2026-03-30 | 7,622 | $5.94 | $45,274.68 |
| 2026-03-27 | 11,251 | $5.69 | $64,018.19 |
| 2026-03-26 | 138,376 | $6.07 | $839,942.32 |
| 2026-03-25 | 70,372 | $5.97 | $420,120.84 |
| 2026-03-24 | 959 | $5.76 | $5,523.84 |
| 2026-03-23 | 50,925 | $5.35 | $272,448.75 |
| 2026-03-17 | 46,355 | $7.04 | $326,339.2 |
| 2026-03-16 | 27,993 | $6.84 | $191,472.12 |
Source: SEC Regulation SHO FTD data. Data is reported with a ~30 day delay. High FTD quantities relative to average daily volume may indicate settlement stress.
Compare ASM to Peers
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: N/A.
SecuritiesDB provides programmatic data aggregation for informational purposes only. None of the metrics, summaries, or algorithmic flags constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any security.