IBP (IBP)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 6.6 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold). DCF fair value of $79 implies 73% downside based on model assumptions.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency of this meat processing entity demonstrates robust fundamentals, evidenced by a 17.8% ROIC that suggests earnings generation exceeds typical cost of capital requirements for the sector. The DuPont decomposition reveals a high-leverage growth model where an equity multiplier of 2.91x significantly amplifies returns alongside strong operational leverage; specifically, healthy gross margins of 34.0% and solid asset turnover of 1.44x drive an impressive net margin of 8.9%, resulting in a total ROE of 37.4%. These quality metrics are further corroborated by a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9, indicating strong financial health relative to peers, while the Beneish M-Score of -2.70 signals low probability of earnings manipulation, collectively painting a picture of a financially stable operator with efficient capital deployment despite modest revenue growth of just 1.0% year-over-year.
Valuation metrics present a notable divergence between market pricing and intrinsic value models, as the current P/E ratio of 29.4x stands at a premium relative to historical norms and sector averages for mature industrial firms. This multiple implies that investors are pricing in significantly higher future growth rates than the current top-line trajectory supports, creating a gap where the DCF fair value estimate of $82 suggests potential downside if consensus expectations fail to materialize. The market appears willing to pay up for the company's high-quality earnings profile and low manipulation risk, yet this optimism must be weighed against the stagnation in revenue expansion which limits near-term multiple expansion catalysts.
Risk assessment is further complicated by significant insider activity, with over $126 million in net selling recorded within the last 90 days. While the fundamental scores suggest operational resilience, such a substantial outflow of ownership capital often precedes or accompanies periods where management anticipates headwinds not yet reflected in quarterly results. The combination of elevated valuation multiples anchored on modest growth and heavy insider distribution creates an asymmetric risk profile that warrants close monitoring as future earnings reports validate or invalidate current premium pricing assumptions.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
Interactive5-year two-stage DCF. Terminal growth 3%. Default sliders match the pre-computed base case. Drag to explore scenarios. Not investment advice.
The growth rate the market implicitly expects over the next 10 years to justify today's price. Compare with historical growth of 1% YoY revenue.
Sensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 13.6% | 15.6% | 17.6% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $91 | $74 | $62 |
| 3% | $98 | $79 | $66 |
| 4% | $106 | $85 | $69 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $204.30.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=15.6%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $79 (-72.7%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedIBP is currently trading at $216.85, a level that requires contextualization within its broader moving average envelope to assess relative value. Without specific upper and lower bound data for the standard deviation bands surrounding the Simple Moving Average, it is impossible to definitively categorize this price point as statistically overextended or deeply undervalued based solely on the provided figure. The absence of band boundaries prevents a clear determination of whether the current market pricing reflects a temporary deviation from its historical mean or represents a sustained trend away from equilibrium. In scenarios where prices trade significantly outside their statistical norms, technical frameworks often suggest an increased probability of mean reversion as volatility compresses and statistical probabilities normalize. Conversely, if the $216.85 level sits comfortably within the central range of the implied envelope, it may indicate a continuation of existing momentum rather than a setup for reversal. The current data point alone does not reveal the width of these bands or the recent trajectory relative to them, leaving the potential for either a bounce toward the mean or further trend extension theoretically open depending on where this price actually resides within the full distribution context. Any interpretation regarding future price action must account for the missing volatility metrics that define the envelope's limits. Traders observing this setup would need to locate the precise upper and lower thresholds of the moving average bands to gauge if $216.85 represents an extreme outlier or a standard market valuation. Until those boundaries are established, the position remains neutral regarding
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.
Dividend History
| Date | Amount | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-13 | $2.1900 | +491.9% |
| 2025-12-15 | $0.3700 | 0.0% |
| 2025-09-15 | $0.3700 | 0.0% |
| 2025-06-13 | $0.3700 | -82.1% |
| 2025-03-14 | $2.0700 | +491.4% |
| 2024-12-13 | $0.3500 | 0.0% |
| 2024-09-13 | $0.3500 | 0.0% |
| 2024-06-14 | $0.3500 | -82.1% |
| 2024-03-14 | $1.9500 | +490.9% |
| 2023-12-14 | $0.3300 | 0.0% |
| 2023-09-14 | $0.3300 | 0.0% |
| 2023-06-14 | $0.3300 | -73.2% |
Dividend and split data from SEC filings and market data. Amounts are per share, not adjusted for splits. Source: yfinance.
Risk Profile
Sharpe = risk-adjusted return (higher is better). Max drawdown = largest peak-to-trough decline. 1,200+ trading days.
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 XHB or SLYG, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell IBP shares regardless of IBP's individual fundamentals. We estimate $454M of passive capital is structurally linked to IBP through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on IBP'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 IBP to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If IBP (IBP) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies MODINE MANUFACTURING CO (MOD) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with IBP. 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.
IBP Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 14 IBP shares, reducing daily market volatility.
IBP (IBP) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 2.7% of the XHB (XHB) and 0.6% of the SLYG (SLYG). Across 11 tracked ETFs, approximately 2M shares (6.9% of float) are held by passive funds and rarely trade on the open market. As passive ownership grows, index inclusion changes may increasingly drive price discovery.
ETFs with Highest IBP Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 11 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
IBP Institutional Volume Profile
252-day volume distribution by price level. The Point of Control (POC) marks — the price where the most institutional volume transacted — an implicit support/resistance floor.
The highest-volume price zone for IBP over the past year sits near $263.67 (19% of 252-day volume). The current price of $204.30 sits 22.5% below the POC — suggesting potential mean-reversion upside if institutional demand reasserts at this level. The highly concentrated volume profile (19% at POC) indicates strong consensus on fair value — institutional participants have repeatedly transacted near this price.
Volume Profile computed from 252 trading days of OHLCV data. Volume allocated to price bins proportionally based on daily high-low range. Not investment advice.
IBP Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does IBP convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
IBP converts 56% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 2.2% 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.
| Date | Failed Shares | Close Price | Notional Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-11 | 10 | $219.99 | $2,199.9 |
| 2026-05-04 | 1,640 | $290.21 | $475,944.4 |
| 2026-04-30 | 30 | $284.55 | $8,536.5 |
| 2026-04-10 | 82 | $285.66 | $23,424.12 |
| 2026-04-01 | 198 | $265.15 | $52,499.7 |
| 2026-03-31 | 3 | $257.55 | $772.65 |
| 2026-03-26 | 789 | $271.60 | $214,292.4 |
| 2026-03-24 | 503 | $267.44 | $134,522.32 |
| 2026-03-06 | 19 | $312.36 | $5,934.84 |
| 2026-03-04 | 379,392 | $325.79 | $123.6M |
| 2026-03-02 | 7,440 | $327.76 | $2.4M |
| 2026-02-26 | 13,277 | $300.74 | $4.0M |
| 2026-02-25 | 23,756 | $319.99 | $7.6M |
| 2026-02-23 | 2,672 | $325.43 | $869,548.96 |
| 2026-02-20 | 38,159 | $321.35 | $12.3M |
| 2026-02-19 | 12,597 | $327.87 | $4.1M |
| 2026-02-17 | 91 | $344.19 | $31,321.29 |
| 2026-02-13 | 301 | $334.93 | $100,813.93 |
| 2026-02-12 | 2,741 | $334.06 | $915,658.46 |
| 2026-02-09 | 923 | $328.92 | $303,593.16 |
| 2026-02-06 | 6 | $323.09 | $1,938.54 |
| 2026-02-04 | 647 | $303.31 | $196,241.57 |
| 2026-01-29 | 26 | $293.96 | $7,642.96 |
| 2026-01-28 | 6 | $292.61 | $1,755.66 |
| 2026-01-23 | 307 | $304.45 | $93,466.15 |
| 2026-01-22 | 56 | $306.24 | $17,149.44 |
| 2026-01-05 | 21 | $267.45 | $5,616.45 |
| 2025-12-31 | 344 | $264.47 | $90,977.68 |
| 2025-12-30 | 103 | $266.50 | $27,449.5 |
| 2025-12-22 | 1,662 | $267.18 | $444,053.16 |
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.
Price Correlations
Statistical correlation of daily returns with other stocks. High correlations indicate stocks that move together; negative correlations can offer diversification.
| Peer | 252-Day (1Y) | 126-Day (6M) | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| WTGXX | NaN | NaN | |
| WMS | 0.726 | 0.627 | High co-movement |
| BLD | 0.721 | 0.753 | High co-movement |
| MTH | 0.698 | 0.784 | Moderate |
| KBH | 0.687 | 0.724 | Moderate |
| TOL | 0.684 | 0.736 | Moderate |
| BLDR | 0.680 | 0.721 | Moderate |
| PHM | 0.680 | 0.737 | Moderate |
| TMHC | 0.671 | 0.734 | Moderate |
| LEN | 0.658 | 0.690 | Moderate |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare IBP to Peers
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-02.
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.