LAUR (LAUR)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 4.4.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of LAUR demonstrate a robust capital allocation profile, evidenced by an ROIC-WACC spread of +9.8%, indicating the firm generates returns on invested capital significantly above its cost of equity. This efficiency is further validated by strong profitability drivers; a DuPont decomposition reveals healthy operating leverage with net margins at 16.6% and gross margins at 28.3%, supported by revenue growth of 8.6%. Qualitative financial health metrics reinforce this operational stability, as the company posts a Piotroski F-Score of 6/9, an Altman Z-Score of 4.4 well within safe territory to avoid distress, and a Beneish M-Score of -2.35 that suggests earnings are unlikely to be manipulated.
Valuation metrics present a mixed picture relative to historical norms and intrinsic value models. The current P/E ratio of 18.1x requires context against sector averages and the company's own history to determine if it represents premium pricing or reasonable growth expectations. While specific DCF calculations suggest a fair value of $78, this figure implies a set trajectory for future cash flows that may not yet be fully reflected in current market prices; however, without explicit historical P/E data or sector benchmarks provided in the input, determining whether the 18.1x multiple is over- or undervalued remains an open assessment based solely on these isolated figures.
Risk and reward dynamics appear balanced given the absence of extreme distress signals or aggressive earnings management indicators. The combination of a high Piotroski score, low manipulation risk per Beneish, and solid Altman metrics points to a stable business model with limited downside volatility from fundamental deterioration. Conversely, the lack of provided data regarding Fama-French alpha adjustments or recent insider trading activity prevents a complete synthesis of short-term sentiment shifts versus long-term structural value creation inherent in this equity.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6.9% | 8.9% | 10.9% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $98 | $68 | $52 |
| 3% | $120 | $78 | $57 |
| 4% | $157 | $92 | $64 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=8.9%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $78 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
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 SLYG or SPSM, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell LAUR shares regardless of LAUR's individual fundamentals. We estimate $100M of passive capital is structurally linked to LAUR through 7 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on LAUR's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 7 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in LAUR to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If LAUR (LAUR) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with LAUR. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 7 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
LAUR Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest LAUR Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 8 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
LAUR Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does LAUR convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
LAUR converts 50% 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 9.8% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 1,010 | $32.67 | $32,996.7 |
| 2026-05-08 | 170,203 | $32.17 | $5.5M |
| 2026-05-06 | 38 | $32.30 | $1,227.4 |
| 2026-05-04 | 351 | $31.24 | $10,965.24 |
| 2026-04-08 | 80 | $34.30 | $2,744 |
| 2026-03-24 | 30 | $34.35 | $1,030.5 |
| 2026-03-23 | 25,370 | $33.29 | $844,567.3 |
| 2026-03-18 | 1,155 | $34.24 | $39,547.2 |
| 2026-03-04 | 9,052 | $32.57 | $294,823.64 |
| 2026-02-20 | 2 | $33.99 | $67.98 |
| 2026-02-18 | 5,610 | $34.75 | $194,947.5 |
| 2025-12-30 | 47 | $33.86 | $1,591.42 |
| 2025-12-10 | 5 | $30.30 | $151.5 |
| 2025-11-12 | 61 | $31.14 | $1,899.54 |
| 2025-11-04 | 193 | $29.28 | $5,651.04 |
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 LAUR 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.