Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicAt 22.3x earnings — a 36% discount to the sector average of 35.0x — BABA is in the lower valuation range. Strong operational fundamentals (Piotroski 7/9) with Altman Z of 1.8. Beneish M-Score of -2.05 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-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of Alibaba Group Holding Limited present a mixed profile characterized by robust profitability metrics offsetting modest capital efficiency. The company generates strong returns through high operational leverage, evidenced by a gross margin of 40.0% and a net margin of 13.1%, which collectively drive the DuPont ROE decomposition via superior profit margins rather than excessive leverage or asset turnover. Financial integrity is further supported by a negative Beneish M-Score of -2.05, suggesting low earnings manipulation risk, alongside a solid Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 indicating strong financial health. However, the capital allocation efficiency remains constrained; while the ROIC-WACC spread sits at +3.2%, an absolute ROIC of only 9.5% implies limited value creation relative to the cost of capital compared to high-growth peers. Additionally, the Altman Z-Score of 1.8 signals elevated bankruptcy risk that warrants close monitoring despite otherwise stable fundamentals.
Valuation metrics suggest the market is pricing in significant future growth expectations not fully reflected in current earnings power. Trading at a P/E ratio of 22.3x against a sector average of 34.6x, the stock appears relatively undervalued within its consumer cyclical peer group, potentially offering an entry point for contrarian investors. This discount contrasts sharply with the DCF-derived fair value estimate of $162 per share; if this target is accurate and current market prices are significantly lower, it implies the market may be underestimating the company's long-term growth trajectory or failing to adequately price in its margin expansion capabilities. The divergence between the conservative multiple relative to peers and the higher implied valuation from cash flow modeling creates a tension where short-term sentiment conflicts with intrinsic value assessments.
Risk-adjusted returns appear sensitive to macroeconomic headwinds given the elevated bankruptcy risk indicated by the Altman Z-Score, which could compress margins if revenue growth fails to stabilize above 5.9%. The combination of moderate capital efficiency and heightened solvency concerns suggests that while the valuation gap offers potential upside based on DCF assumptions, the path to realizing this value is fraught with execution risks that could widen the spread between current prices and fair value estimates further before converging.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6% | 6.3% | 8.3% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $139 | $128 | $85 |
| 3% | $181 | $162 | $99 |
| 4% | $264 | $225 | $119 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=6.3%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $162 (+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 XNTK or ARKF, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell BABA shares regardless of Alibaba Group Holding Limited's individual fundamentals. We estimate $113M of passive capital is structurally linked to BABA through 4 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on BABA's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 4 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in Alibaba Group Holding Limited to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If Alibaba Group Holding Limited (BABA) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies TESLA INC (TSLA) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 3 ETFs with BABA. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 4 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
BABA Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest BABA Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 4 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
BABA Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does Alibaba Group Holding Limited convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
Alibaba Group Holding Limited converts 37% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a moderate conversion rate — significant EBITDA is consumed by capital expenditures, working capital changes, or interest payments. The 63% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 3.2% confirms that reinvested capital creates 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 18,090 | $145.81 | $2.6M |
| 2026-05-11 | 4,300 | $140.06 | $602,258 |
| 2026-05-08 | 6,350 | $141.00 | $895,350 |
| 2026-05-06 | 9,054 | $132.26 | $1.2M |
| 2026-05-05 | 374 | $133.27 | $49,842.98 |
| 2026-05-04 | 51,487 | $131.50 | $6.8M |
| 2026-05-01 | 150 | $131.88 | $19,782 |
| 2026-04-30 | 409 | $130.43 | $53,345.87 |
| 2026-04-29 | 5,655 | $130.85 | $739,956.75 |
| 2026-04-28 | 2,384 | $132.52 | $315,927.68 |
| 2026-04-24 | 4,408 | $131.70 | $580,533.6 |
| 2026-04-22 | 2,237 | $135.38 | $302,845.06 |
| 2026-04-20 | 2,300 | $141.01 | $324,323 |
| 2026-04-17 | 62,040 | $138.59 | $8.6M |
| 2026-04-13 | 1,304 | $127.33 | $166,038.32 |
| 2026-04-10 | 2,002 | $127.68 | $255,615.36 |
| 2026-04-09 | 29,550 | $125.32 | $3.7M |
| 2026-04-08 | 11,664 | $119.72 | $1.4M |
| 2026-04-07 | 21,178 | $122.31 | $2.6M |
| 2026-04-06 | 8,719 | $122.05 | $1.1M |
| 2026-04-02 | 924 | $123.73 | $114,326.52 |
| 2026-04-01 | 9,342 | $125.46 | $1.2M |
| 2026-03-31 | 184 | $121.98 | $22,444.32 |
| 2026-03-26 | 3,664 | $129.87 | $475,843.68 |
| 2026-03-25 | 234 | $125.48 | $29,362.32 |
| 2026-03-20 | 14,000 | $124.90 | $1.7M |
| 2026-03-19 | 7,852 | $134.43 | $1.1M |
| 2026-03-18 | 12,297 | $136.57 | $1.7M |
| 2026-03-16 | 173,601 | $135.21 | $23.5M |
| 2026-03-13 | 137,084 | $134.20 | $18.4M |
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 BABA 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.