FRO (FRO)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicStrong operational fundamentals (Piotroski 7/9).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe company exhibits a distinct divergence between its capital efficiency and revenue trajectory, generating an ROIC of 9.3% while simultaneously contracting sales by 4.2% year-over-year. This contraction suggests that the current profitability is being driven disproportionately by leverage or margin expansion rather than volume growth, as evidenced by healthy gross margins of 32.8% and net margins of 19.3%. Fundamental quality indicators appear robust; a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 signals strong financial health with positive operating cash flow and improving profitability, while a Beneish M-Score of -2.65 effectively rules out earnings manipulation risks typically associated with aggressive accounting practices.
Valuation metrics present a mixed signal relative to historical norms and implied growth rates. Trading at a current P/E multiple of 20.9x, the stock commands a premium that likely assumes continued margin stability despite declining top-line activity. However, the DCF model calculates a fair value of $20, which may imply that the market is pricing in a recovery or that the current valuation does not fully account for the revenue headwinds. The gap between the explicit multiple and the discounted cash flow output requires scrutiny regarding whether the 19.3% net margin can be sustained without top-line expansion to justify the price-to-earnings ratio against sector peers.
The risk profile is characterized by a significant delta in growth momentum versus capital returns, creating an asymmetric setup where high profitability masks underlying revenue erosion. The combination of shrinking revenues and static ROIC suggests that future earnings visibility may depend heavily on operational efficiency gains or cost-cutting measures rather than market share expansion. Investors must weigh the strength of the balance sheet indicators against the potential downside risk inherent in a business model that is profitable but failing to scale its top line, leaving uncertainty regarding whether current valuations adequately price this structural challenge.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $26 | $17 | $12 |
| 3% | $32 | $20 | $13 |
| 4% | $40 | $24 | $15 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $20 (+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 VSS or VGK, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell FRO shares regardless of FRO's individual fundamentals. We estimate $34M of passive capital is structurally linked to FRO through 3 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on FRO'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 FRO to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If FRO (FRO) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies ASML Holding NV (ASML) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with FRO. 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.
FRO Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest FRO Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 3 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
FRO Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does FRO convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
FRO converts 71% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag.
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 | 79,309 | $37.19 | $2.9M |
| 2026-05-13 | 16,066 | $38.53 | $619,022.98 |
| 2026-05-12 | 12,659 | $38.15 | $482,940.85 |
| 2026-05-11 | 210 | $39.51 | $8,297.1 |
| 2026-05-08 | 3,573 | $38.12 | $136,202.76 |
| 2026-05-07 | 1,469 | $37.70 | $55,381.3 |
| 2026-04-27 | 3,271 | $35.59 | $116,414.89 |
| 2026-04-23 | 4 | $34.66 | $138.64 |
| 2026-04-20 | 600 | $37.13 | $22,278 |
| 2026-04-17 | 61 | $35.15 | $2,144.15 |
| 2026-04-09 | 30,375 | $36.15 | $1.1M |
| 2026-04-08 | 24,369 | $34.98 | $852,427.62 |
| 2026-04-06 | 241,952 | $36.60 | $8.9M |
| 2026-04-01 | 4,301 | $34.86 | $149,932.86 |
| 2026-03-26 | 1 | $33.75 | $33.75 |
| 2026-03-25 | 6 | $35.44 | $212.64 |
| 2026-03-20 | 2,694 | $32.88 | $88,578.72 |
| 2026-03-12 | 1,082 | $33.50 | $36,247 |
| 2026-03-09 | 13,000 | $34.56 | $449,280 |
| 2026-03-06 | 12,738 | $34.92 | $444,810.96 |
| 2026-03-05 | 2,900 | $36.28 | $105,212 |
| 2026-03-03 | 45 | $39.62 | $1,782.9 |
| 2026-02-27 | 4,236 | $37.28 | $157,918.08 |
| 2026-02-24 | 10,642 | $35.09 | $373,427.78 |
| 2026-02-23 | 194,370 | $34.72 | $6.7M |
| 2026-02-20 | 306,019 | $33.82 | $10.3M |
| 2026-02-19 | 300,061 | $33.28 | $10.0M |
| 2026-02-11 | 40,759 | $29.05 | $1.2M |
| 2026-02-10 | 39,073 | $29.10 | $1.1M |
| 2026-02-03 | 44,296 | $28.56 | $1.3M |
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 FRO 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.