e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicELF trades at 34.9x earnings, roughly in line with its sector average of 32.6x. Financial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 6.2.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency for e.l.f. Beauty presents a notable drag on value creation, evidenced by an ROIC-WACC spread of -2.4%, indicating that the firm is currently destroying economic value relative to its cost of capital despite generating strong top-line momentum with 28.3% year-over-year revenue growth. This operational profile is underpinned by exceptional pricing power and scalability, reflected in a robust 71.2% gross margin and an 8.5% net margin; however, the DuPont components suggest that this profitability is not yet being leveraged into superior returns on invested capital. Financial integrity appears sound with a high Altman Z-Score of 6.2 signaling low bankruptcy risk and a negative Beneish M-Score of -2.48 suggesting earnings are likely free from manipulation, while the Piotroski F-score of 6/9 indicates solid fundamental health without reaching peak financial strength conditions.
Valuation metrics place the stock at a premium multiple relative to its historical trajectory but remain broadly inline with sector peers trading at an average P/E of 33.9x; the current 34.9x forward earnings multiple suggests the market is pricing in sustained high-growth execution rather than value reversion. A discounted cash flow analysis anchors fair value at $41, implying that if growth assumptions hold and capital efficiency improves to close the negative ROIC-WACC gap, there may be room for expansion from current levels. The divergence between aggressive revenue acceleration and sub-optimal return on invested assets creates a scenario where valuation support relies heavily on future margin leverage or asset turnover improvements rather than immediate multiple compression.
Risk assessment reveals a mixed profile: while insider activity data is absent to gauge management alignment, the combination of high growth velocity and negative capital efficiency introduces execution risk if operating leverage fails to materialize in subsequent periods. The stock's positioning within the Consumer Defensive sector at a premium valuation requires sustained validation that current sales momentum can translate into improved absolute returns on equity before the market deems the multiple justified beyond its historical norms.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 12.3% | 14.3% | 16.3% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $47 | $38 | $32 |
| 3% | $51 | $41 | $34 |
| 4% | $56 | $44 | $36 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=14.3%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $41 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Valuation Context
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
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 SLY or VDC, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell ELF shares regardless of e.l.f. Beauty, Inc.'s individual fundamentals. We estimate $116M of passive capital is structurally linked to ELF through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on ELF'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 e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. (ELF) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Walmart Inc. (WMT) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with ELF. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 9 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
ELF Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest ELF Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 9 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
ELF Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
e.l.f. Beauty, Inc. converts 56% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-2.4%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 165,816 | $53.74 | $8.9M |
| 2026-05-13 | 2,611 | $55.66 | $145,328.26 |
| 2026-05-08 | 77 | $61.79 | $4,757.83 |
| 2026-05-07 | 22,422 | $61.43 | $1.4M |
| 2026-05-05 | 5,459 | $61.85 | $337,639.15 |
| 2026-04-30 | 346 | $61.08 | $21,133.68 |
| 2026-04-29 | 648 | $63.00 | $40,824 |
| 2026-04-24 | 137 | $66.23 | $9,073.51 |
| 2026-04-21 | 6 | $68.42 | $410.52 |
| 2026-04-09 | 21 | $61.77 | $1,297.17 |
| 2026-03-26 | 8,063 | $69.65 | $561,587.95 |
| 2026-03-23 | 100 | $72.50 | $7,250 |
| 2026-03-17 | 148 | $73.62 | $10,895.76 |
| 2026-03-16 | 43,915 | $73.41 | $3.2M |
| 2026-03-09 | 149 | $82.44 | $12,283.56 |
| 2026-03-03 | 47 | $81.64 | $3,837.08 |
| 2026-03-02 | 691 | $92.05 | $63,606.55 |
| 2026-02-27 | 43,892 | $94.65 | $4.2M |
| 2026-02-23 | 65 | $94.02 | $6,111.3 |
| 2026-02-19 | 1,393 | $88.04 | $122,639.72 |
| 2026-02-17 | 4 | $81.50 | $326 |
| 2026-02-11 | 33,251 | $73.26 | $2.4M |
| 2026-02-06 | 22,179 | $76.86 | $1.7M |
| 2026-02-05 | 1,408 | $84.63 | $119,159.04 |
| 2026-02-04 | 6 | $84.81 | $508.86 |
| 2026-01-26 | 2,816 | $94.16 | $265,154.56 |
| 2026-01-20 | 1,727 | $89.99 | $155,412.73 |
| 2026-01-16 | 2,579 | $89.18 | $229,995.22 |
| 2026-01-12 | 727 | $87.02 | $63,263.54 |
| 2026-01-08 | 21,468 | $82.10 | $1.8M |
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 ELF 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.