GPI (GPI)

$4.1B
Market Cap
13.1
P/E Ratio
0.91
Beta
0.68%
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 6/9Altman Z 3.4 SafeBeneish M -2.69 CleanROIC−WACC +0.9%

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

Financial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 3.4.

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

Algorithmic Teardown

AI-Generated

The capital allocation efficiency for GPI demonstrates a modest positive spread between its return on invested capital of 8.3% and the weighted average cost of capital at 7.5%, indicating value creation albeit with limited margin of safety given the narrow +0.9% differential. This operational profile is supported by robust financial health metrics, evidenced by a Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 which signals strong fundamental stability, while an Altman Z-Score of 3.4 places the firm in a safe zone regarding bankruptcy risk and a Beneish M-Score of -2.69 suggests low probability of earnings manipulation. However, the DuPont decomposition reveals that profitability is heavily reliant on volume rather than pricing power; despite revenue growth accelerating at 13.2% year-over-year, net margins remain compressed at just 1.4%, suggesting that top-line expansion has not yet translated into significant bottom-line leverage or high-margin operations.

Valuation multiples currently sit at 13.1x forward earnings, which requires contextualization against historical ranges and sector peers to determine if the market is pricing in excessive optimism regarding future margin expansion or sustainable growth rates. While a discounted cash flow model implies an intrinsic fair value of $827, this figure must be weighed carefully against the current trading price and the assumption embedded within the DCF inputs, particularly given the modest spread between returns and capital costs. The market's pricing appears to hinge on whether management can successfully convert rapid revenue growth into higher net margins over time, as the current low margin structure limits the durability of any valuation premium above historical norms.

Risk assessment indicates a moderate risk/reward profile where the strong fundamental scores provide downside protection against distress or fraud concerns, yet the narrow ROIC-WACC spread and thin net margins constrain upside potential if growth decelerates. The combination of high revenue velocity with low profitability creates an asymmetric scenario where stock price appreciation relies entirely on margin expansion rather than organic volume scaling alone. Investors must evaluate whether the current valuation adequately compensates for the execution risk inherent in transforming a growing top line into sustainable, compounding returns within this specific economic model.

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

DCF Sandbox

Interactive

Sensitivity Matrix

TG ↓ / WACC →6%7.5%9.5%
2%$996$670$440
3%$1339$827$514
4%$2025$1073$615

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

Pre-computed DCF: WACC=7.5%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $827 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

6/9
Piotroski F-Score
Average — mixed operational signals
3.4
Altman Z-Score
Safe Zone — above 3.0 threshold per academic model. Thresholds: >3 safe, 1.8–3 grey, <1.8 distress.
-2.69
Beneish M-Score
Below threshold — no statistical earnings quality concern per Beneish model. Threshold: <-2.22 = below threshold.

Profitability & Value Creation

16.1%
Gross Margin
1.4%
Net Margin
8.3%
ROIC
7.5%
WACC
ROIC − WACC Spread: +0.9%— Positive spread.
+13.2%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
-34.7%
Earnings Growth (YoY)
424.5M
Free Cash Flow
6%
FCF Payout Ratio

✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.

Balance Sheet Health

2.71x
Debt / Equity
1.08x
Current Ratio
2.6x
Interest Coverage
4.0x
Net Debt / EBITDA
5.62%
FCF Yield
855.4M
EBITDA

Earnings Surprise History

Q4
✓ Beat
Est: $9.67
Act: $10.20
+5.4%
Q3
✓ Beat
Est: $10.45
Act: $11.52
+10.3%
Q2
✗ Miss
Est: $10.73
Act: $10.45
-2.6%
Q1
✗ Miss
Est: $9.16
Act: $8.49
-7.3%

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

6.9
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
1.40
Price/Book
186286
Avg Volume
$488.39
52W High
$292.44
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$136M
Tracked Passive Exposure
8
ETFs Holding GPI
0.12%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$114B
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like XRT or SLYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell GPI shares regardless of GPI's individual fundamentals. We estimate $136M of passive capital is structurally linked to GPI through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on GPI'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 GPI to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

GPI Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
GPIEpicenterVBRETFVTWOETFSPSMETFAMZNLow RiskTSLALow RiskHDLow RiskMCDLow RiskTJXLow Risk
GPI Price Drop (%)0

If GPI (GPI) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with GPI. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.

Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 8 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.

GPI Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
GPI

Float lock-up computed from 8 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

GPI Capital Efficiency

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

Free Cash Flow
$425M
EBITDA
$855M
FCF Conversion
50%
Reinvestment Rate
50%
50% of EBITDA → Free Cash
0% (cash burn)25% (low)50% (efficient)100% (pure cash)
ROIC
8.3%
ROIC − WACC Spread
0.8%

GPI converts 50% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The 50% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 0.8% confirms that reinvested capital creates 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
2026-05-08542$350.16$189,786.72
2026-04-3013$349.21$4,539.73
2026-03-2519$317.85$6,039.15
2026-03-237$318.33$2,228.31
2026-03-03828$320.32$265,224.96
2026-02-2794$334.38$31,431.72
2026-02-2672$335.30$24,141.6
2026-02-2572$335.07$24,125.04
2026-02-2435$332.92$11,652.2
2026-02-1814$330.32$4,624.48
2026-02-1348$336.01$16,128.48
2026-01-2858$396.96$23,023.68
2026-01-236$402.62$2,415.72
2026-01-087$394.12$2,758.84
2025-12-261$406.38$406.38
2025-12-2234$405.21$13,777.14
2025-12-121$426.91$426.91
2025-12-1124$419.98$10,079.52
2025-11-2845$402.93$18,131.85
2025-11-17195$391.91$76,422.45
2025-11-071,672$384.85$643,469.2

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 GPI 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.