LEG (LEG)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 8/9, Altman Z 3.0 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency demonstrates a robust spread between return on invested capital and the weighted average cost of capital at +3.9%, indicating value creation potential despite operational headwinds. This economic quality is reinforced by an exceptionally strong Piotroski F-Score of 8/9, suggesting stable fundamentals with minimal financial distress risk as evidenced by an Altman Z-Score of 3.0 and a Beneish M-Score of -2.78 that points to low earnings manipulation probability. However, the DuPont decomposition reveals a critical tension: while leverage appears adequate given the high F-score, profitability is being eroded by declining revenue growth of -7.5% against modest gross margins of 18.4%, resulting in net margins compressing to just 5.8%.
Valuation metrics present a significant divergence between current market pricing and intrinsic value models. The stock trades at a constricted P/E multiple of 5.7x, which warrants comparison against historical averages and sector peers to determine if the discount reflects temporary distress or structural deterioration in earnings power. More notably, discounted cash flow analysis assigns a fair value of $30, implying that current market prices are substantially below model-derived estimates based on assumed growth trajectories. This discrepancy suggests the market may be pricing in persistent revenue contraction rather than recognizing the underlying capital efficiency and low manipulation risk highlighted by fundamental scores.
The synthesis of these factors creates a complex risk-reward profile where high-quality balance sheet metrics contrast sharply with deteriorating top-line performance. Investors must weigh whether the depressed valuation multiple adequately compensates for the -7.5% revenue decline or if it offers an asymmetric opportunity given the DCF implied upside to $30. The low Beneish M-Score provides confidence in earnings integrity, yet the negative growth trajectory remains a primary catalyst that could prevent the stock from realizing its modeled fair value without a reversal in operational momentum.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6% | 6.4% | 8.4% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $26 | $23 | $15 |
| 3% | $35 | $30 | $18 |
| 4% | $53 | $42 | $22 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=6.4%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $30 (+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 VNQI or SLYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell LEG shares regardless of LEG's individual fundamentals. We estimate $57M of passive capital is structurally linked to LEG through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on LEG'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 LEG to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If LEG (LEG) 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 LEG. 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.
LEG Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest LEG Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 9 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
LEG Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does LEG convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
LEG converts 58% 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 3.9% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-08 | 2,386 | $10.30 | $24,575.8 |
| 2026-05-06 | 1,315 | $10.82 | $14,228.3 |
| 2026-04-30 | 23,789 | $10.78 | $256,445.42 |
| 2026-04-14 | 448 | $11.25 | $5,040 |
| 2026-04-08 | 132 | $9.52 | $1,256.64 |
| 2026-03-27 | 1 | $9.90 | $9.9 |
| 2026-03-24 | 1,587 | $10.03 | $15,917.61 |
| 2026-03-16 | 94 | $10.18 | $956.92 |
| 2026-03-13 | 89 | $10.21 | $908.69 |
| 2026-03-12 | 348 | $10.47 | $3,643.56 |
| 2026-03-05 | 192 | $11.23 | $2,156.16 |
| 2026-03-03 | 1 | $11.50 | $11.5 |
| 2026-02-20 | 1,290 | $12.18 | $15,712.2 |
| 2026-01-29 | 186 | $11.71 | $2,178.06 |
| 2026-01-28 | 12,688 | $11.90 | $150,987.2 |
| 2026-01-16 | 10,087 | $12.74 | $128,508.38 |
| 2026-01-13 | 3,964 | $12.24 | $48,519.36 |
| 2026-01-12 | 4,699 | $12.31 | $57,844.69 |
| 2025-12-29 | 459 | $11.05 | $5,071.95 |
| 2025-12-26 | 9,800 | $10.94 | $107,212 |
| 2025-12-22 | 3,594 | $11.14 | $40,037.16 |
| 2025-12-16 | 1,122 | $11.65 | $13,071.3 |
| 2025-12-04 | 191 | $11.40 | $2,177.4 |
| 2025-12-03 | 1 | $11.60 | $11.6 |
| 2025-12-02 | 2,273 | $11.94 | $27,139.62 |
| 2025-11-28 | 328 | $10.14 | $3,325.92 |
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 LEG 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.