AZZ Inc. (AZZ)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicAt 13.1x earnings — a 71% discount to the sector average of 44.7x — AZZ is in the lower valuation range. Financial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 3.7 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of AZZ Inc. present a distinct divergence between operational efficiency and capital allocation effectiveness, characterized by an ROIC-WACC spread of -0.6% that indicates the firm is currently destroying value relative to its cost of equity. While DuPont decomposition reveals robust pricing power with a 24.2% gross margin translating into an 8.2% net margin, this profitability is not being leveraged effectively for growth; revenue expansion remains stagnant at just 2.6% year-over-year. Credit risk metrics offer conflicting signals regarding financial stability: the Altman Z-Score of 3.7 suggests a moderate safety buffer against bankruptcy, yet the Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 points to strong fundamental quality and balance sheet health that often contradicts the value-destructive capital return profile implied by the negative spread.
Valuation metrics highlight a significant discount relative to peers, with the current P/E ratio of 13.1x trading at less than one-third of the sector average of 45.7x, suggesting the market may be pricing in persistent underperformance or specific structural headwinds rather than fundamental deterioration alone. The DCF model implies a fair value of $118; however, reconciling this target price with the observed negative ROIC spread requires assuming future operational improvements that are not currently reflected in earnings growth. This disconnect between intrinsic valuation models and current multiple compression indicates that the market is likely discounting the stock based on its inability to generate returns exceeding the cost of capital at present levels.
Risk assessment reveals a company with low earnings manipulation risk, evidenced by a Beneish M-Score of -2.67, yet faces headwinds from slow revenue growth and inefficient capital deployment. The combination of high Piotroski fundamentals against a negative value spread creates an asymmetric scenario where the stock appears cheap on traditional multiples but carries execution risk if management cannot reverse the trend toward positive ROIC-WACC spreads to unlock the DCF-implied upside.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8.5% | 10.5% | 12.5% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $149 | $104 | $76 |
| 3% | $176 | $118 | $85 |
| 4% | $215 | $137 | $95 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.5%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $118 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Valuation Context
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
Balance Sheet Health
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 SLYG or SPSM, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell AZZ shares regardless of AZZ Inc.'s individual fundamentals. We estimate $141M of passive capital is structurally linked to AZZ through 7 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on AZZ's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 7 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in AZZ Inc. to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If AZZ Inc. (AZZ) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies SANMINA CORP (SANM) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with AZZ. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 7 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
AZZ Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest AZZ Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 7 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
AZZ Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does AZZ Inc. convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
AZZ Inc. converts 40% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The 60% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-0.6%), suggesting reinvested capital is destroying shareholder value.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-13 | 364 | $148.11 | $53,912.04 |
| 2026-05-11 | 66 | $147.60 | $9,741.6 |
| 2026-05-04 | 2,030 | $143.53 | $291,365.9 |
| 2026-05-01 | 50 | $143.04 | $7,152 |
| 2026-04-28 | 561 | $144.78 | $81,221.58 |
| 2026-04-27 | 109 | $143.33 | $15,622.97 |
| 2026-04-23 | 58 | $134.91 | $7,824.78 |
| 2026-03-23 | 5 | $118.98 | $594.9 |
| 2026-03-19 | 234 | $122.12 | $28,576.08 |
| 2026-02-27 | 1,051 | $134.40 | $141,254.4 |
| 2026-02-24 | 5,032 | $134.43 | $676,451.76 |
| 2026-02-09 | 185 | $130.00 | $24,050 |
| 2026-01-29 | 754 | $123.15 | $92,855.1 |
| 2026-01-28 | 924 | $122.88 | $113,541.12 |
| 2026-01-23 | 105 | $126.10 | $13,240.5 |
| 2026-01-16 | 319 | $123.22 | $39,307.18 |
| 2025-12-31 | 89 | $108.89 | $9,691.21 |
| 2025-12-29 | 637 | $110.48 | $70,375.76 |
| 2025-12-24 | 82 | $110.73 | $9,079.86 |
| 2025-12-09 | 2 | $104.08 | $208.16 |
| 2025-12-05 | 1 | $106.78 | $106.78 |
| 2025-12-03 | 183 | $103.91 | $19,015.53 |
| 2025-11-17 | 255 | $98.14 | $25,025.7 |
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 AZZ 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.