Financial Services

AXIS Capital Holdings Limited (AXS)

$7.7B
Market Cap
8.1
P/E Ratio
0.63
Beta
1.78%
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 4/9Altman Z 0.8 DistressROIC−WACC -5.1%

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

At 8.1x earnings — a 58% discount to the sector average of 19.2x — AXS is in the lower valuation range. Financial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 0.8.

Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.

Algorithmic Teardown

AI-Generated

The fundamental economics of AXIS Capital Holdings Limited reveal a distinct divergence between return on invested capital and shareholder returns, driven primarily by significant financial leverage rather than operational efficiency. While the DuPont decomposition indicates that equity multipliers account for 5.42x in the reported 15.9% ROE, the underlying ROIC stands at only 2.9%, suggesting the spread over the cost of capital is minimal or potentially negative depending on the specific WACC assumption. This leverage-heavy structure contrasts sharply with a modest asset turnover rate of 0.19x and a robust net margin of 15.7%. Quality metrics further temper the equity return narrative; a Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 signals average financial health without clear signs of strong momentum or improving fundamentals, while revenue growth remains subdued at 6.8% year-over-year.

Valuation metrics present AXIS as materially discounted relative to its peer group and historical norms, with the current P/E ratio of 8.1x trading substantially below the sector average of 18.3x. This compression implies that the market is pricing in limited future growth potential or assigning a higher risk premium due to the low ROIC profile and moderate Piotroski score. Although the exact DCF fair value cannot be calculated without an explicit WACC and terminal growth rate, the wide valuation gap suggests the stock may offer margin of safety if earnings persist at current levels, yet it also reflects skepticism regarding the sustainability of returns given the inefficient capital deployment indicated by the low ROIC. Insider activity over the past 90 days remains neutral with zero net flow, offering no clear directional signal from management or major shareholders to counterbalance these valuation concerns.

The risk-reward profile is characterized by a tension between attractive entry valuations and structural inefficiencies in capital generation. The combination of an ROIC below typical cost-of-capital thresholds and a mediocre Piotroski score introduces execution risks that are not fully mitigated by the current discount. Investors must weigh whether the 8.1x P/E adequately compensates for the lack of organic growth acceleration and the reliance on leverage to drive equity returns, rather than operating margin expansion or asset efficiency improvements.

Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.

Valuation Context

8.1x
AXS P/E
19.2x
Sector Avg
-58%
vs Sector

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

4/9
Piotroski F-Score
Average — mixed operational signals
0.8
Altman Z-Score
Distress Zone — below 1.8 threshold per academic model. Thresholds: >3 safe, 1.8–3 grey, <1.8 distress.

Profitability & Value Creation

15.7%
Net Margin
2.9%
ROIC
8.1%
WACC
ROIC − WACC Spread: -5.1%— Negative spread.
+6.8%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
-6.7%
Earnings Growth (YoY)

DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition

Breaking down Return on Equity to see how the company generates its ROE — efficiency, margins, or leverage.

15.7%
Net Profit Margin
NI ÷ Revenue
×
0.19x
Asset Turnover
Revenue ÷ Assets
×
5.42x
Equity Multiplier
Assets ÷ Equity
=
15.9%
Return on Equity
⚠️ High equity multiplier — ROE is being amplified by leverage, not operational excellence.

Balance Sheet Health

4.42x
Debt / Equity
19.2x
Interest Coverage
0.4x
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.3B
EBITDA

Earnings Surprise History

Q4
✓ Beat
Est: $2.69
Act: $3.17
+18.0%
Q3
✓ Beat
Est: $2.93
Act: $3.29
+12.3%
Q2
✓ Beat
Est: $2.87
Act: $3.25
+13.4%
Q1
✓ Beat
Est: $3.12
Act: $3.25
+4.2%

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.

Loading drawdown chart...

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.

Loading beta chart...
Rolling Beta Market (β = 1.0)

Fundamentals

6.9
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
1.28
Price/Book
637669
Avg Volume
$110.34
52W High
$84.81
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$394M
Tracked Passive Exposure
8
ETFs Holding AXS
0.09%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$423B
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like KIE or ONEV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell AXS shares regardless of AXIS Capital Holdings Limited's individual fundamentals. We estimate $394M of passive capital is structurally linked to AXS through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on AXS's daily trading dynamics.

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 AXIS Capital Holdings Limited to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

AXS Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
AXSEpicenterVBETFVYMETFVXFETFCINFHigh RiskOSCRUnknownACGLHigh RiskEGHigh RiskUPSMed Risk
AXS Price Drop (%)0

If AXIS Capital Holdings Limited (AXS) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies CINCINNATI FINANCIAL CORP (CINF) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 3 ETFs with AXS. 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.

AXS Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
AXS

Float lock-up computed from 11 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

Fails-to-Deliver (FTD) History

SEC-reported settlement failures. Elevated FTDs can indicate high short-selling pressure, operational settlement issues, or naked shorting activity.

DateFailed SharesClose PriceNotional Value
2026-05-12226$98.51$22,263.26
2026-04-297$100.35$702.45
2026-04-2810$99.51$995.1
2026-04-103,671$102.43$376,020.53
2026-03-231$99.57$99.57
2026-03-031,924$106.91$205,694.84
2026-02-202$102.59$205.18
2026-02-095$106.53$532.65
2025-12-18156$107.06$16,701.36
2025-11-2680$100.16$8,012.8
2025-11-25388$99.57$38,633.16
2025-10-1570$98.88$6,921.6
2025-10-1412$97.34$1,168.08
2025-10-0612,217$94.52$1.2M

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 AXS 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.