GWRE (GWRE)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 6.5 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics present a stark divergence between high-growth revenue momentum and deteriorating capital efficiency. While the company demonstrates robust top-line expansion with 22.6% year-over-year growth, supported by healthy gross margins of 62.5%, this velocity is not translating into value creation; the return on invested capital stands at merely 2.3%, significantly undercutting the weighted average cost of capital to produce a negative spread of -8.9%. This indicates that new investments are currently destroying shareholder value rather than generating returns above the hurdle rate, despite a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 suggesting strong balance sheet stability and an Altman Z-Score of 6.5 implying low bankruptcy risk. The Beneish M-Score of -2.71 further reinforces confidence in earnings quality, yet the DuPont drivers appear skewed by leverage or asset intensity rather than margin expansion or operational turnover improvements.
Valuation metrics reflect aggressive market pricing that assumes a sustained reversion to high-quality growth profiles despite the negative ROIC-WACC spread. The current price-to-earnings ratio of 65.5x is markedly elevated relative to typical sector norms for firms failing to generate positive economic returns on capital, suggesting investors are heavily discounting future margin improvements or assuming a structural shift in profitability drivers not yet visible in historical data. A discounted cash flow analysis places the fair value at $99, implying that current market prices may be pricing in growth rates and terminal multiples that exceed what is justified by the observed -8.9% capital efficiency spread unless significant operational leverage materializes to bridge this gap between revenue velocity and bottom-line accretion.
The risk profile remains complex given the tension between high insider confidence indicators, such as a low Beneish M-Score, and the fundamental drag on shareholder value creation. While the balance sheet appears secure according to Altman metrics, the persistent negative ROIC-WACC spread introduces substantial downside risk if growth decelerates or capital allocation strategies fail to improve returns before costs rise further. The market's willingness to sustain a 65.5x multiple suggests that any deviation from the current high-growth trajectory could precipitate a sharp re-rating downward, as the premium is entirely dependent on future improvements in capital efficiency rather than past performance stability.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 9.2% | 11.2% | 13.2% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $118 | $90 | $73 |
| 3% | $135 | $99 | $78 |
| 4% | $157 | $111 | $85 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=11.2%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $99 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
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 MDYG or XSW, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell GWRE shares regardless of GWRE's individual fundamentals. We estimate $798M of passive capital is structurally linked to GWRE through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on GWRE'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 GWRE to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If GWRE (GWRE) 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 GWRE. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 12 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
GWRE Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest GWRE Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 12 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
GWRE Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does GWRE convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
GWRE converts 325% 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 (-8.9%), 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 | 91 | $131.09 | $11,929.19 |
| 2026-04-20 | 362 | $140.36 | $50,810.32 |
| 2026-04-13 | 1,155 | $117.95 | $136,232.25 |
| 2026-04-07 | 21,273 | $147.83 | $3.1M |
| 2026-03-30 | 162 | $144.68 | $23,438.16 |
| 2026-03-26 | 17,680 | $149.44 | $2.6M |
| 2026-03-23 | 131 | $155.61 | $20,384.91 |
| 2026-03-18 | 359 | $163.11 | $58,556.49 |
| 2026-03-17 | 853 | $161.74 | $137,964.22 |
| 2026-03-10 | 8 | $163.30 | $1,306.4 |
| 2026-02-27 | 776 | $144.08 | $111,806.08 |
| 2026-02-23 | 59 | $127.66 | $7,531.94 |
| 2026-02-17 | 2,258 | $127.03 | $286,833.74 |
| 2026-02-13 | 57,620 | $125.34 | $7.2M |
| 2026-02-12 | 55,868 | $130.41 | $7.3M |
| 2026-02-02 | 49 | $140.76 | $6,897.24 |
| 2026-01-21 | 24,946 | $155.45 | $3.9M |
| 2025-12-22 | 11 | $199.92 | $2,199.12 |
| 2025-12-19 | 89 | $197.46 | $17,573.94 |
| 2025-12-05 | 3,386 | $211.07 | $714,683.02 |
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 GWRE 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.