INDV (INDV)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicBelow-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-GeneratedThe 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
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 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.
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
ETFs with Highest INDV Exposure
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.
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.
| Date | Failed Shares | Close Price | Notional Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-12 | 29,735 | $38.84 | $1.2M |
| 2026-05-01 | 135 | $36.78 | $4,965.3 |
| 2026-04-28 | 88 | $34.31 | $3,019.28 |
| 2026-04-24 | 298 | $33.16 | $9,881.68 |
| 2026-04-22 | 1,453 | $32.23 | $46,830.19 |
| 2026-04-21 | 10,109 | $32.42 | $327,733.78 |
| 2026-04-14 | 524 | $31.60 | $16,558.4 |
| 2026-04-02 | 469 | $30.65 | $14,374.85 |
| 2026-03-26 | 127 | $30.26 | $3,843.02 |
| 2026-03-25 | 221 | $28.79 | $6,362.59 |
| 2026-03-23 | 80 | $29.30 | $2,344 |
| 2026-03-20 | 10 | $30.50 | $305 |
| 2026-03-18 | 126 | $31.33 | $3,947.58 |
| 2026-03-17 | 576 | $30.97 | $17,838.72 |
| 2026-03-13 | 142,156 | $30.86 | $4.4M |
| 2026-03-09 | 1,200 | $32.27 | $38,724 |
| 2026-03-04 | 44 | $30.87 | $1,358.28 |
| 2026-03-02 | 1,631 | $32.72 | $53,366.32 |
| 2026-02-26 | 2,711 | $33.63 | $91,170.93 |
| 2026-02-23 | 4,095 | $33.89 | $138,779.55 |
| 2026-02-19 | 3,462 | $34.36 | $118,954.32 |
| 2026-02-17 | 463 | $34.58 | $16,010.54 |
| 2026-02-13 | 1,536 | $33.76 | $51,855.36 |
| 2026-02-10 | 4,748 | $33.86 | $160,767.28 |
| 2026-02-05 | 2,653 | $34.34 | $91,104.02 |
| 2026-02-04 | 360 | $35.45 | $12,762 |
| 2026-01-30 | 3,490 | $34.71 | $121,137.9 |
| 2026-01-29 | 50 | $34.93 | $1,746.5 |
| 2026-01-28 | 206 | $34.74 | $7,156.44 |
| 2026-01-27 | 2,043 | $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.