INDV (INDV)

$4.2B
Market Cap
20.8
P/E Ratio
1.21
Beta
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 3/9Beneish M -1.46 Flag (> −2.22)

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

Below-average fundamentals indicated by Piotroski score of 3/9. Beneish M-Score of -1.46 exceeds the -2.22 academic threshold — earnings quality may warrant further review.

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

Algorithmic Teardown

AI-Generated

The company exhibits exceptional capital efficiency with an ROIC of 78.2%, driven primarily by a robust DuPont decomposition where an 80.2% gross margin and 17.0% net margin suggest high pricing power or niche product differentiation rather than leverage-driven returns, given the absence of specific debt metrics to confirm elevated financial leverage. However, this fundamental strength is tempered by weak operational momentum; revenue growth sits at a modest 4.3% year-over-year while the Piotroski F-Score of 3/9 signals deteriorating balance sheet quality or declining profitability relative to peers. The Beneish M-Score of -1.46 provides some comfort regarding earnings manipulation risks, yet the combination of sluggish top-line expansion and a low F-score creates a dichotomy where high returns on invested capital are not being translated into scalable revenue growth.

Valuation multiples reflect this tension between superior profitability metrics and constrained growth expectations. A current P/E ratio of 20.8x appears elevated when weighed against sub-5% revenue expansion, suggesting the market is pricing in significant future margin maintenance or a potential turnaround rather than organic top-line acceleration. Without historical sector benchmarks provided to contextualize whether this multiple represents a premium for quality or an overhang from growth concerns, the valuation implies that investors are demanding certainty on sustainability given the weak Piotroski score. The disconnect between the high ROIC and low revenue growth rate indicates that current pricing may be dependent on maintaining these narrow profit margins without corresponding scale increases.

Risk assessment reveals a concerning divergence: while capital allocation has been efficient historically, the low F-Score hints at potential structural issues or cyclical headwinds not yet fully priced in. The absence of insider activity data and specific risk factor deltas limits a complete picture of management alignment or volatility exposure. Ultimately, the stock presents a profile where exceptional margin quality coexists with stagnating growth and weakening financial health indicators, requiring careful scrutiny on whether current valuation levels account for the potential erosion of those high margins if revenue fails to accelerate meaningfully in subsequent quarters.

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

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

3/9
Piotroski F-Score
Weak — below-average operational and profitability metrics
-1.46
Beneish M-Score
Above threshold — earnings quality may warrant further review per Beneish model. Threshold: <-2.22 = below threshold.

Profitability & Value Creation

80.2%
Gross Margin
17.0%
Net Margin
78.2%
ROIC
+4.3%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
+2900.0%
Earnings Growth (YoY)
-94.0M
Free Cash Flow

Balance Sheet Health

-13.13x
Debt / Equity
0.71x
Current Ratio
6.3x
Interest Coverage
0.3x
Net Debt / EBITDA
304.0M
EBITDA

Earnings Surprise History

Q4
✓ Beat
Est: $0.23
Act: $0.41
+75.7%
Q3
✓ Beat
Est: $0.25
Act: $0.51
+104.0%
Q2
✓ Beat
Est: $0.41
Act: $0.72
+74.9%
Q1
✓ Beat
Est: $0.67
Act: $0.82
+21.7%

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

10.0
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
-43.56
Price/Book
2M
Avg Volume
$38.00
52W High
$10.63
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$157M
Tracked Passive Exposure
8
ETFs Holding INDV
0.15%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$105B
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like XPH or SLYG, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell INDV shares regardless of INDV's individual fundamentals. We estimate $157M of passive capital is structurally linked to INDV through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on INDV'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 INDV to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

INDV Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
INDVEpicenterVBKETFVHTETFVTWOETFCORTLow RiskOGNHigh RiskLQDAUnknownAXSMUnknownLGNDLow Risk
INDV Price Drop (%)0

If INDV (INDV) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS INC (CORT) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 3 ETFs with INDV. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.

Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 9 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.

INDV Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
INDV

Float lock-up computed from 9 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

INDV Capital Efficiency

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

Free Cash Flow
$-94,000,000
EBITDA
$304M
FCF Conversion
-31%
Reinvestment Rate
131%
-31% of EBITDA → Free Cash
0% (cash burn)25% (low)50% (efficient)100% (pure cash)

INDV converts -31% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, negative FCF conversion — the company is consuming cash faster than it generates EBITDA, which is unsustainable long-term. The 131% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion.

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
2026-05-1229,735$38.84$1.2M
2026-05-01135$36.78$4,965.3
2026-04-2888$34.31$3,019.28
2026-04-24298$33.16$9,881.68
2026-04-221,453$32.23$46,830.19
2026-04-2110,109$32.42$327,733.78
2026-04-14524$31.60$16,558.4
2026-04-02469$30.65$14,374.85
2026-03-26127$30.26$3,843.02
2026-03-25221$28.79$6,362.59
2026-03-2380$29.30$2,344
2026-03-2010$30.50$305
2026-03-18126$31.33$3,947.58
2026-03-17576$30.97$17,838.72
2026-03-13142,156$30.86$4.4M
2026-03-091,200$32.27$38,724
2026-03-0444$30.87$1,358.28
2026-03-021,631$32.72$53,366.32
2026-02-262,711$33.63$91,170.93
2026-02-234,095$33.89$138,779.55
2026-02-193,462$34.36$118,954.32
2026-02-17463$34.58$16,010.54
2026-02-131,536$33.76$51,855.36
2026-02-104,748$33.86$160,767.28
2026-02-052,653$34.34$91,104.02
2026-02-04360$35.45$12,762
2026-01-303,490$34.71$121,137.9
2026-01-2950$34.93$1,746.5
2026-01-28206$34.74$7,156.44
2026-01-272,043$33.58$68,603.94

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 INDV 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.