FLS (FLS)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 4.4 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital efficiency profile reveals a company generating an ROIC of 11.3%, which sits comfortably above typical cost of equity thresholds, indicating value creation potential despite modest revenue expansion at just 3.8% year-over-year. The DuPont decomposition underscores that this return on equity of 15.4% is driven primarily by leverage rather than operational intensity; the 2.53x equity multiplier amplifies returns while the asset turnover ratio remains constrained at 0.83x, suggesting capital-intensive operations or slow inventory cycles relative to sales. Financial integrity appears robust with a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 and a Beneish M-Score of -2.60, signaling strong fundamentals and low likelihood of earnings manipulation according to standard screening metrics.
Valuation multiples currently trade at a premium, with the P/E ratio expanding to 32.0x, which demands confirmation that future growth will materially outpace historical averages or sector peers to justify this spread. While the DCF model implies an intrinsic fair value of $83, the market price must be weighed against the assumption embedded in that valuation regarding implied long-term growth rates and terminal multiples; a 15% ROE supported by moderate margins may not sustain such high multiple expansion if macroeconomic headwinds compress operating leverage. The disconnect between current pricing and fundamental earnings generation suggests investors are anticipating significant margin improvement or acceleration in asset efficiency beyond the reported net margin of 7.3%.
Risk assessment highlights divergent signals regarding ownership structure, as insider activity over the last ninety days shows $978,359 in net selling, which often precedes broader market skepticism about near-term catalysts despite the company's clean financial scores. This divergence between strong Piotroski fundamentals and active principal reduction warrants close monitoring of upcoming earnings to determine if management views current valuation levels as appropriate or excessive relative to the 11.3% ROIC generation capability.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 9.9% | 11.9% | 13.9% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $74 | $57 | $46 |
| 3% | $84 | $62 | $49 |
| 4% | $96 | $69 | $53 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=11.9%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $62 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ 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.
Balance Sheet Health
Insider Activity (Last 90 Days)
Open-market buys vs sells by company insiders. Source: yfinance.
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 MDYG or SPMD, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell FLS shares regardless of FLS's individual fundamentals. We estimate $624M of passive capital is structurally linked to FLS through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on FLS'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 FLS to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If FLS (FLS) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies FLEX LTD (FLEX) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with FLS. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 17 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
FLS Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest FLS Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 19 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
FLS Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does FLS convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
FLS converts 62% 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 (-0.6%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-07 | 789 | $73.38 | $57,896.82 |
| 2026-05-05 | 9,183 | $70.41 | $646,575.03 |
| 2026-05-04 | 10,001 | $71.65 | $716,571.65 |
| 2026-04-29 | 1,129 | $85.06 | $96,032.74 |
| 2026-04-27 | 7,907 | $83.22 | $658,020.54 |
| 2026-04-21 | 2,172 | $83.41 | $181,166.52 |
| 2026-04-02 | 204 | $75.40 | $15,381.6 |
| 2026-03-26 | 48,446 | $76.59 | $3.7M |
| 2026-03-24 | 647 | $74.26 | $48,046.22 |
| 2026-03-23 | 106 | $71.40 | $7,568.4 |
| 2026-03-17 | 163 | $73.65 | $12,004.95 |
| 2026-03-04 | 93 | $83.46 | $7,761.78 |
| 2026-02-23 | 88,268 | $88.94 | $7.9M |
| 2026-02-20 | 41 | $88.21 | $3,616.61 |
| 2026-02-12 | 75 | $86.54 | $6,490.5 |
| 2026-02-06 | 100 | $78.98 | $7,898 |
| 2026-01-29 | 9 | $76.90 | $692.1 |
| 2026-01-23 | 5,854 | $78.60 | $460,124.4 |
| 2026-01-22 | 5,854 | $77.47 | $453,509.38 |
| 2026-01-21 | 5,854 | $75.90 | $444,318.6 |
| 2026-01-20 | 443 | $77.17 | $34,186.31 |
| 2025-12-22 | 2,851 | $71.06 | $202,592.06 |
| 2025-12-16 | 148 | $71.82 | $10,629.36 |
| 2025-11-19 | 635 | $65.54 | $41,617.9 |
| 2025-11-17 | 12,200 | $67.16 | $819,352 |
| 2025-11-14 | 12,200 | $68.00 | $829,600 |
| 2025-11-13 | 12,200 | $69.95 | $853,390 |
| 2025-11-10 | 13 | $69.24 | $900.12 |
| 2025-10-31 | 14,816 | $67.35 | $997,857.6 |
| 2025-10-15 | 292 | $51.25 | $14,965 |
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 FLS 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.