GXO (GXO)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 1.5.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of GXO present a stark divergence between top-line momentum and capital efficiency. While revenue growth accelerates at 12.6% year-over-year, the company's ability to generate returns on invested capital is severely compromised by an ROIC-WACC spread of -9.4%, indicating that current operations are destroying value relative to the cost of equity. This inefficiency is further underscored by a Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 and an Altman Z-Score of 1.5, suggesting moderate financial stability but raising concerns regarding long-term solvency margins typical for firms in distress zones. Despite these capital allocation challenges, the Beneish M-Score of -2.51 points to low earnings manipulation risk, yet the net margin compression to just 0.2% against an 11.6% gross margin reveals significant operating leverage pressures that constrain profitability despite robust sales expansion.
Valuation metrics reflect extreme market optimism disconnected from underlying cash flow generation capabilities. The current P/E ratio of 178.8x stands at a premium that appears unjustified given the negative ROIC-WACC spread and negligible net margins, implying the market is pricing in aggressive future margin expansion or multiple compression rather than sustainable earnings power. Without evidence of a DCF fair value model or implied growth assumptions provided in the data, this disparity suggests investors are relying heavily on speculative growth narratives to offset the stark reality that current operations fail to cover their cost of capital. The disconnect between high revenue velocity and sub-par return metrics indicates the stock price may be vulnerable if consensus expectations for margin improvement do not materialize soon.
No additional risk factor deltas, insider activity data, or Fama-French alpha statistics were provided in the input; therefore, a synthesis regarding specific market anomalies or managerial sentiment shifts cannot be constructed from the available information. The current data snapshot highlights a tension between growth velocity and capital efficiency that warrants close monitoring of upcoming earnings reports to determine if operational improvements can eventually align ROIC with WACC levels.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. 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 XTN or MDYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell GXO shares regardless of GXO's individual fundamentals. We estimate $381M of passive capital is structurally linked to GXO through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on GXO'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 GXO to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If GXO (GXO) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies RXO INC (RXO) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with GXO. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 11 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
GXO Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest GXO Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 11 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
GXO Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does GXO convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
GXO converts 16% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a low conversion rate suggesting heavy reinvestment. This may indicate a growth phase (building capacity) or structural capital intensity. The 84% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-9.4%), 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 | 57,499 | $49.91 | $2.9M |
| 2026-05-05 | 364 | $46.27 | $16,842.28 |
| 2026-05-04 | 166 | $56.22 | $9,332.52 |
| 2026-04-27 | 9 | $56.27 | $506.43 |
| 2026-04-17 | 212 | $57.07 | $12,098.84 |
| 2026-04-16 | 2,081 | $55.76 | $116,036.56 |
| 2026-04-14 | 101 | $56.60 | $5,716.6 |
| 2026-03-31 | 55 | $48.86 | $2,687.3 |
| 2026-03-27 | 205 | $51.72 | $10,602.6 |
| 2026-03-26 | 3,069 | $52.16 | $160,079.04 |
| 2026-03-24 | 1,118 | $51.46 | $57,532.28 |
| 2026-03-20 | 11,336 | $51.27 | $581,196.72 |
| 2026-03-13 | 11,918 | $52.47 | $625,337.46 |
| 2026-02-18 | 2,592 | $65.36 | $169,413.12 |
| 2026-02-17 | 2,592 | $65.51 | $169,801.92 |
| 2026-02-11 | 60 | $58.00 | $3,480 |
| 2026-02-02 | 1,953 | $56.59 | $110,520.27 |
| 2026-01-28 | 100 | $57.92 | $5,792 |
| 2026-01-22 | 111 | $56.82 | $6,307.02 |
| 2026-01-20 | 391 | $56.54 | $22,107.14 |
| 2026-01-16 | 10 | $57.14 | $571.4 |
| 2026-01-15 | 10 | $56.93 | $569.3 |
| 2025-12-26 | 1,282 | $54.29 | $69,599.78 |
| 2025-12-22 | 505 | $53.29 | $26,911.45 |
| 2025-12-05 | 3,567 | $52.15 | $186,019.05 |
| 2025-12-01 | 1 | $50.74 | $50.74 |
| 2025-11-25 | 29 | $47.99 | $1,391.71 |
| 2025-11-24 | 5,964 | $47.56 | $283,647.84 |
| 2025-11-21 | 42,821 | $46.21 | $2.0M |
| 2025-11-19 | 657 | $47.91 | $31,476.87 |
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 GXO 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.