Industrials

Elbit Systems Ltd. (ESLT)

$38.8B
Market Cap
72.0
P/E Ratio
-0.18
Beta
0.49%
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 8/9Altman Z 4.0 SafeBeneish M -2.47 CleanROIC−WACC -0.5%

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

ESLT trades at 72.0x earnings — a 61% premium to its sector average of 44.7x — without a dominant ROIC-WACC spread. Financial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 8/9, Altman Z 4.0 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).

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

Algorithmic Teardown

AI-Generated

The underlying capital allocation efficiency presents a notable divergence from the reported profitability metrics. While the DuPont decomposition indicates that return on equity is primarily driven by financial leverage rather than operational excellence, with an equity multiplier of 3.07x amplifying modest net margins and asset turnover, the firm maintains a robust Piotroski F-Score of 8/9 alongside a negative Beneish M-Score of -2.47. This combination suggests strong fundamental quality and low earnings manipulation risk despite the thin spread between return on invested capital at 7.5% and implied cost of equity; the high leverage masks the fact that core operating returns are relatively muted compared to the aggressive valuation multiple currently supported by a revenue growth rate of 16.3%.

Valuation metrics reflect extreme market optimism detached from current earnings power, as evidenced by a price-to-earnings ratio of 72.0x which significantly exceeds historical norms and sector averages implied by such high multiples for companies with sub-8% ROIC. The disparity between the current trading levels and a DCF-derived fair value of $899 implies that market participants are pricing in sustained hyper-growth or assume risk-adjusted returns far exceeding what the 7.5% ROIC-WACC spread can justify under standard discounting models. Such a compression suggests the stock is vulnerable to multiple contraction if growth rates decelerate, as the high valuation leaves little margin for error regarding future cash flow assumptions embedded in the DCF model.

Although specific risk factor deltas and insider activity data were not provided to complete a full Fama-French alpha analysis or assess recent management positioning, the structural reliance on leverage within an otherwise clean Piotroski profile creates a binary outcome scenario. The high P/E multiple acts as both a catalyst for potential appreciation if growth accelerates beyond current expectations and a primary downside risk should earnings miss or economic conditions tighten, forcing a re-rating of the equity multiplier component in the DuPont framework.

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

DCF Sandbox

Interactive

Sensitivity Matrix

TG ↓ / WACC →6%8%10%
2%$227$157$121
3%$288$179$132
4%$409$214$147

Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs .

Pre-computed DCF: WACC=8.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $179 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.

Valuation Context

72.0x
ESLT P/E
44.7x
Sector Avg
+61%
vs Sector

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

8/9
Piotroski F-Score
Strong — high operational efficiency and profitability signals
4.0
Altman Z-Score
Safe Zone — above 3.0 threshold per academic model. Thresholds: >3 safe, 1.8–3 grey, <1.8 distress.
-2.47
Beneish M-Score
Below threshold — no statistical earnings quality concern per Beneish model. Threshold: <-2.22 = below threshold.

Profitability & Value Creation

24.4%
Gross Margin
6.7%
Net Margin
7.5%
ROIC
8.0%
WACC
ROIC − WACC Spread: -0.5%— Negative spread.
+16.3%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
+66.4%
Earnings Growth (YoY)
552.8M
Free Cash Flow
20%
FCF Payout Ratio

✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.

DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition

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

6.7%
Net Profit Margin
NI ÷ Revenue
×
0.63x
Asset Turnover
Revenue ÷ Assets
×
3.07x
Equity Multiplier
Assets ÷ Equity
=
12.9%
Return on Equity
⚠️ High equity multiplier — ROE is being amplified by leverage, not operational excellence.

Balance Sheet Health

2.07x
Debt / Equity
1.29x
Current Ratio
8.9x
Interest Coverage
-0.5x
Net Debt / EBITDA
1.44%
FCF Yield
804.9M
EBITDA

Earnings Surprise History

Q4
✓ Beat
Est: $2.06
Act: $2.57
+24.8%
Q3
✓ Beat
Est: $2.57
Act: $3.23
+25.7%
Q2
✓ Beat
Est: $2.73
Act: $3.35
+22.9%
Q1
✓ Beat
Est: $3.14
Act: $3.56
+13.4%

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

48.6
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
9.19
Price/Book
169088
Avg Volume
$1016.06
52W High
$354.68
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$616M
Tracked Passive Exposure
7
ETFs Holding ESLT
0.06%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$1.0T
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like ARKX or ARKQ, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell ESLT shares regardless of Elbit Systems Ltd.'s individual fundamentals. We estimate $616M of passive capital is structurally linked to ESLT through 7 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on ESLT'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 Elbit Systems Ltd. to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

ESLT Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
ESLTEpicenterVXUSETFVEAETFVEUETFRKLB UQUnknownTERLow RiskKTOSLow RiskAMDLow RiskLHXMed Risk
ESLT Price Drop (%)0

If Elbit Systems Ltd. (ESLT) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies ROCKET LAB (RKLB UQ) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with ESLT. 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.

ESLT Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
ESLT

Float lock-up computed from 7 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

ESLT Capital Efficiency

How efficiently does Elbit Systems Ltd. convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.

Free Cash Flow
$553M
EBITDA
$805M
FCF Conversion
69%
Reinvestment Rate
31%
69% of EBITDA → Free Cash
0% (cash burn)25% (low)50% (efficient)100% (pure cash)
ROIC
7.5%
ROIC − WACC Spread
-0.5%

Elbit Systems Ltd. converts 69% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-0.5%), 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.

DateFailed SharesClose PriceNotional Value
2026-05-1316$802.21$12,835.36
2026-05-1163$782.21$49,279.23
2026-05-049$831.22$7,480.98
2026-04-2938$834.05$31,693.9
2026-04-28461$819.65$377,858.65
2026-04-27258$821.96$212,065.68
2026-04-241$852.34$852.34
2026-04-2224$865.48$20,771.52
2026-04-20645$872.58$562,814.1
2026-04-1718$869.79$15,656.22
2026-04-16281$899.00$252,619
2026-04-1520$920.79$18,415.8
2026-04-131,346$925.24$1.2M
2026-04-105,813$928.47$5.4M
2026-04-09131$920.52$120,588.12
2026-04-022,680$896.53$2.4M
2026-04-0191$849.09$77,267.19
2026-03-31212$816.77$173,155.24
2026-03-301$869.82$869.82
2026-03-253,372$894.80$3.0M
2026-03-24299$902.96$269,985.04
2026-03-2398$920.75$90,233.5
2026-03-182,534$1014.33$2.6M
2026-03-171,070$874.50$935,715
2026-03-124,164$881.17$3.7M
2026-03-11575$877.12$504,344
2026-03-0919,745$936.14$18.5M
2026-03-0611,713$888.10$10.4M
2026-03-051,253$885.00$1.1M
2026-03-0444$823.08$36,215.52

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 ESLT 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.