LPLA (LPLA)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicBelow-average fundamentals indicated by Piotroski score of 2/9. Beneish M-Score of -1.65 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 a classic high-growth, low-margin operational profile where revenue expansion of 37.2% YoY is the primary engine for value creation rather than margin compression or leverage shifts. The DuPont decomposition reveals that return on equity is driven almost entirely by asset turnover at 0.92x and moderate financial leverage of 3.46x, while net margins remain constrained at 5.1%. This structure results in a modest ROIC-WACC spread of 8.5%, indicating limited excess returns relative to the cost of capital despite robust top-line velocity. Financial integrity signals are mixed; the low Piotroski F-Score of 2/9 suggests deteriorating fundamentals or aggressive accounting, yet the negative Beneish M-Score of -1.65 provides some counterbalance by implying a lower likelihood of manipulation compared to industry peers with similar scores.
Valuation metrics reflect significant market optimism regarding future growth potential that is not fully anchored in current profitability efficiency. The forward P/E of 27.5x sits substantially above the implied fair value derived from discounting cash flows at these specific margin and turnover rates, suggesting the market prices in a multiple expansion or accelerated margin improvement not yet realized in the income statement. This premium valuation creates sensitivity to any deviation in the stated revenue growth trajectory, as the current multiples leave little room for error if the 37% growth rate decelerates while margins remain flat at their historical lows.
Insider activity presents a notable divergence from the bullish sentiment embedded in the stock's multiple; net selling of approximately $2.3 million over the last ninety days indicates that internal stakeholders may be taking profits or adjusting exposure despite strong top-line numbers. Combined with the weak Piotroski score, this insider flow suggests caution regarding the sustainability of current growth rates and the quality of earnings generation. The risk/reward profile appears skewed toward volatility, where the disconnect between high valuation multiples, modest ROIC efficiency, and active insider selling creates an environment susceptible to sharp re-rating if fundamental execution falters.
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 VOT or VXF, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell LPLA shares regardless of LPLA's individual fundamentals. We estimate $2.3B of passive capital is structurally linked to LPLA through 8 tracked ETFs. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption cycles can create noticeable volume spikes unrelated to company news.
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 LPLA to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If LPLA (LPLA) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with LPLA. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 12 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
LPLA Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest LPLA Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 12 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
LPLA Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does LPLA convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
LPLA converts -45% 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 145% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 1.0% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-07 | 101 | $324.73 | $32,797.73 |
| 2026-05-06 | 15 | $327.58 | $4,913.7 |
| 2026-05-05 | 9 | $320.85 | $2,887.65 |
| 2026-05-04 | 1,101 | $318.63 | $350,811.63 |
| 2026-05-01 | 47,418 | $334.13 | $15.8M |
| 2026-04-21 | 5,684 | $323.46 | $1.8M |
| 2026-04-20 | 733 | $317.41 | $232,661.53 |
| 2026-04-16 | 51 | $331.41 | $16,901.91 |
| 2026-04-15 | 531 | $322.45 | $171,220.95 |
| 2026-04-14 | 538 | $321.89 | $173,176.82 |
| 2026-04-10 | 3 | $314.57 | $943.71 |
| 2026-04-02 | 1 | $289.27 | $289.27 |
| 2026-03-25 | 8 | $300.17 | $2,401.36 |
| 2026-03-23 | 28,594 | $293.08 | $8.4M |
| 2026-03-13 | 4 | $289.62 | $1,158.48 |
| 2026-03-10 | 161 | $312.80 | $50,360.8 |
| 2026-03-06 | 6 | $316.92 | $1,901.52 |
| 2026-03-04 | 7,200 | $306.22 | $2.2M |
| 2026-03-03 | 793 | $306.00 | $242,658 |
| 2026-02-25 | 224 | $308.70 | $69,148.8 |
| 2026-02-24 | 2 | $303.88 | $607.76 |
| 2026-02-20 | 17,055 | $327.92 | $5.6M |
| 2026-02-12 | 183 | $338.67 | $61,976.61 |
| 2026-02-05 | 14,963 | $388.96 | $5.8M |
| 2026-02-03 | 20,131 | $376.33 | $7.6M |
| 2026-01-23 | 382 | $378.24 | $144,487.68 |
| 2026-01-22 | 963 | $370.95 | $357,224.85 |
| 2026-01-07 | 82 | $376.56 | $30,877.92 |
| 2025-12-30 | 19 | $366.25 | $6,958.75 |
| 2025-12-29 | 19 | $372.16 | $7,071.04 |
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 LPLA 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.