KALU (KALU)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicStrong operational fundamentals (Piotroski 7/9) with Altman Z of 2.7.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe company's fundamental economics present a distinct divergence between profitability efficiency and capital allocation quality. While the DuPont decomposition reveals that Return on Equity is primarily driven by high financial leverage (Equity Multiplier of 3.10x) rather than operational margin expansion or asset turnover, this structural reliance masks an underlying erosion in value creation capability. The negative ROIC-WACC spread of -2.6% indicates that the firm's invested capital generates returns below its cost of equity, a signal often associated with declining competitive moats despite a robust Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 suggesting strong financial health and momentum. This contrasts sharply with an Altman Z-Score of 2.7, which places the entity in the gray zone for potential distress, while the negative Beneish M-Score of -2.43 offers some reassurance regarding earnings manipulation risks.
Valuation metrics currently trade at a premium relative to the company's capital efficiency profile. A Price-to-Earnings ratio of 17.4x appears stretched given that the business is destroying economic value as evidenced by the negative spread between return on invested capital and the weighted average cost of capital. While revenue growth remains healthy at 11.5% year-overY, sustaining this trajectory without improving operational leverage or reducing reliance on debt financing poses a challenge for future multiple expansion. The market appears to be pricing in significant organic growth potential that may not materialize if the underlying return profile continues to lag behind the cost of capital required by shareholders.
Recent insider activity adds another layer of complexity to the risk-reward assessment, with net selling totaling $2.9 million over the last 90 days. This outflow from ownership coincides with a fundamental setup where operational returns fail to cover financing costs, potentially signaling management's concern regarding future capital deployment or valuation levels relative to intrinsic worth. The combination of deteriorating capital efficiency metrics and active insider divestiture suggests that current market pricing may be optimistic about the sustainability of earnings growth absent significant improvements in how deployed capital generates risk-adjusted returns.
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
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.
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 XME or SLYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell KALU shares regardless of KALU's individual fundamentals. We estimate $158M of passive capital is structurally linked to KALU through 6 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on KALU's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 6 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in KALU to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If KALU (KALU) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Linde plc (LIN) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with KALU. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 6 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
KALU Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest KALU Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 7 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
KALU Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does KALU convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
KALU converts -8% 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 108% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-2.6%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-05 | 16 | $169.42 | $2,710.72 |
| 2026-04-23 | 481 | $163.03 | $78,417.43 |
| 2026-04-14 | 2,059 | $143.42 | $295,301.78 |
| 2026-04-13 | 4 | $142.67 | $570.68 |
| 2026-04-07 | 14 | $130.39 | $1,825.46 |
| 2026-03-26 | 95 | $118.22 | $11,230.9 |
| 2026-03-24 | 31 | $111.39 | $3,453.09 |
| 2026-03-13 | 154 | $121.00 | $18,634 |
| 2026-03-04 | 27 | $132.58 | $3,579.66 |
| 2026-02-05 | 86 | $138.00 | $11,868 |
| 2025-12-31 | 542 | $118.11 | $64,015.62 |
| 2025-12-22 | 4,977 | $114.12 | $567,975.24 |
| 2025-12-18 | 98 | $111.08 | $10,885.84 |
| 2025-12-16 | 62 | $109.91 | $6,814.42 |
| 2025-12-08 | 1 | $104.62 | $104.62 |
| 2025-12-03 | 290 | $98.30 | $28,507 |
| 2025-12-01 | 18 | $96.05 | $1,728.9 |
| 2025-11-28 | 67 | $95.81 | $6,419.27 |
| 2025-11-24 | 3,611 | $91.80 | $331,489.8 |
| 2025-11-21 | 44 | $89.62 | $3,943.28 |
| 2025-11-13 | 10 | $95.09 | $950.9 |
| 2025-11-05 | 105 | $91.25 | $9,581.25 |
| 2025-10-24 | 107 | $93.12 | $9,963.84 |
| 2025-10-01 | 369 | $77.16 | $28,472.04 |
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 KALU 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.