FLOC (FLOC)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 5.7 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency of FLOC presents a structural headwind, evidenced by an ROIC-WACC spread of -3.0%, indicating that the firm is currently destroying value relative to its cost of equity despite generating substantial top-line momentum with 41.9% year-over-year revenue growth. This valuation disconnect suggests the market may be pricing in aggressive future expansion rather than current operational profitability, as the DuPont drivers appear skewed toward high velocity or leverage given the compressed net margin of 5.5% against a robust gross margin of 35.3%. However, fundamental stability metrics offer some counterbalance; a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 signals strong financial health and momentum, while an Altman Z-Score of 5.7 places the entity well within safe territory regarding bankruptcy risk. The Beneish M-Score of -3.14 further corroborates these findings by suggesting earnings are unlikely to be materially manipulated, lending credibility to the reported growth figures even as capital returns remain suboptimal in absolute terms.
Valuation metrics reveal a significant divergence between current pricing and intrinsic value models, with the stock trading at 17.0x forward earnings while the DCF framework implies a fair value of $182 per share. This wide gap suggests the market is currently discounting the security significantly below its calculated present value, potentially reflecting skepticism about sustaining the hyper-growth rate or concerns regarding margin compression as scale increases. If the implied growth assumptions embedded in the DCF model hold true and operational leverage improves to close the negative ROIC-WACC spread, the current multiple offers substantial upside potential relative to fundamental worth. Conversely, if revenue decelerates even moderately from its 41.9% pace or margins contract further, the premium valuation could become unsustainable despite the strong qualitative scores provided by the Piotroski and Altman frameworks.
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% | $221 | $164 | $128 |
| 3% | $256 | $182 | $139 |
| 4% | $307 | $206 | $153 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.5%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $182 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
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 XES or VFQY, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell FLOC shares regardless of FLOC's individual fundamentals. We estimate $12M of passive capital is structurally linked to FLOC through 3 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on FLOC's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 3 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in FLOC to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If FLOC (FLOC) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies SOLARIS ENERGY INFRASTRUCTUR (SEI) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with FLOC. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 3 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
FLOC Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest FLOC Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 3 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
FLOC Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does FLOC convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
FLOC converts 55% 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 (-3.0%), 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 | 450 | $27.15 | $12,217.5 |
| 2026-04-30 | 9,132 | $24.51 | $223,825.32 |
| 2026-04-29 | 9,244 | $24.33 | $224,906.52 |
| 2026-03-24 | 127 | $21.93 | $2,785.11 |
| 2026-03-23 | 200 | $21.69 | $4,338 |
| 2026-03-12 | 584 | $23.22 | $13,560.48 |
| 2026-03-09 | 5,479 | $23.30 | $127,660.7 |
| 2026-03-06 | 1,830 | $23.10 | $42,273 |
| 2026-03-05 | 1,623 | $23.03 | $37,377.69 |
| 2026-02-27 | 73 | $24.37 | $1,779.01 |
| 2026-02-26 | 2 | $22.28 | $44.56 |
| 2026-02-10 | 14 | $22.61 | $316.54 |
| 2026-02-06 | 232,186 | $21.26 | $4.9M |
| 2026-02-05 | 241,640 | $22.15 | $5.4M |
| 2026-02-04 | 241,500 | $22.62 | $5.5M |
| 2026-02-03 | 103,455 | $21.16 | $2.2M |
| 2026-01-21 | 216 | $20.10 | $4,341.6 |
| 2026-01-08 | 49 | $18.69 | $915.81 |
| 2025-12-29 | 73 | $18.01 | $1,314.73 |
| 2025-12-19 | 7,729 | $17.95 | $138,735.55 |
| 2025-12-15 | 628 | $18.62 | $11,693.36 |
| 2025-12-05 | 142 | $18.24 | $2,590.08 |
| 2025-12-04 | 4 | $17.95 | $71.8 |
| 2025-12-02 | 6 | $16.87 | $101.22 |
| 2025-11-13 | 635 | $16.72 | $10,617.2 |
| 2025-11-12 | 2,697 | $17.47 | $47,116.59 |
| 2025-11-06 | 80 | $18.58 | $1,486.4 |
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 FLOC 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.