LW (LW)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 2.4.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency for LW presents a mixed fundamental profile, characterized by an ROIC of 8.9% that appears insufficient to justify the equity multiplier-driven leverage observed in its DuPont decomposition. While the company sustains a robust 20.6% return on equity fueled primarily by significant financial leverage (Equity Multiplier of 4.25x) rather than operational excellence, this structure exposes earnings volatility given the modest net margin expansion potential relative to asset turnover constraints. The divergence between the low Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 and a relatively strong Beneish M-Score of -2.63 suggests deteriorating financial strength despite limited indicators of aggressive earnings manipulation; however, flat revenue growth at -0.2% reinforces concerns regarding top-line momentum in an otherwise stable gross margin environment of 21.7%.
Valuation metrics currently reflect market skepticism toward the company's growth trajectory and leverage-heavy capital structure. Trading at a forward P/E multiple of 14.9x, which sits below typical sector benchmarks for firms with similar profit margins but above those of distressed peers, implies the market is pricing in modest future growth rather than value creation from organic expansion. A Discounted Cash Flow analysis anchors the fair value estimate at $10 per share; if current trading levels exceed this threshold based on implied terminal values and discount rates used in the model, the security may be offering limited upside potential absent a material shift in revenue dynamics or margin compression relief.
Absence of insider activity over the preceding 90 days further neutralizes signals regarding management confidence, leaving investors to weigh the high leverage ratio against the stagnant top-line performance. The risk/reward calculus hinges on whether the current valuation discount adequately compensates for the low Piotroski score and lack of revenue growth acceleration, while the Fama-French style attributes remain indeterminate without sector-specific beta data provided in the input set.
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% | $4 | $2 | $0 |
| 3% | $12 | $8 | $0 |
| 4% | $27 | $19 | $0 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=6.4%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $8 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
⚠️ Dividend consumes >80% of FCF — sustainability risk.
DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition
Breaking down Return on Equity to see how the company generates its ROE — efficiency, margins, or leverage.
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 SLYV or SPSM, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell LW shares regardless of LW's individual fundamentals. We estimate $670M of passive capital is structurally linked to LW through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on LW'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 LW to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If LW (LW) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Walmart Inc. (WMT) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with LW. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 20 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
LW Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest LW Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 21 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
LW Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does LW convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
LW converts 21% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a moderate conversion rate — significant EBITDA is consumed by capital expenditures, working capital changes, or interest payments. The 79% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 2.5% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-05 | 8,143 | $42.54 | $346,403.22 |
| 2026-04-29 | 5,301 | $43.08 | $228,367.08 |
| 2026-04-24 | 2,436 | $43.94 | $107,037.84 |
| 2026-04-22 | 387 | $44.79 | $17,333.73 |
| 2026-04-15 | 487 | $43.73 | $21,296.51 |
| 2026-04-14 | 1 | $42.28 | $42.28 |
| 2026-04-13 | 1 | $42.19 | $42.19 |
| 2026-04-08 | 14 | $40.58 | $568.12 |
| 2026-04-07 | 500 | $40.17 | $20,085 |
| 2026-03-31 | 12 | $40.95 | $491.4 |
| 2026-03-23 | 125,957 | $40.00 | $5.0M |
| 2026-03-10 | 619 | $45.75 | $28,319.25 |
| 2026-03-05 | 229 | $46.03 | $10,540.87 |
| 2026-02-23 | 1,933 | $48.27 | $93,305.91 |
| 2026-02-17 | 1,100 | $49.82 | $54,802 |
| 2026-02-06 | 2 | $47.48 | $94.96 |
| 2026-02-02 | 9 | $45.93 | $413.37 |
| 2026-01-30 | 202 | $45.96 | $9,283.92 |
| 2026-01-20 | 9,578 | $43.33 | $415,014.74 |
| 2026-01-15 | 475 | $43.28 | $20,558 |
| 2026-01-08 | 5,621 | $40.29 | $226,470.09 |
| 2025-12-26 | 472 | $42.48 | $20,050.56 |
| 2025-12-23 | 78 | $42.80 | $3,338.4 |
| 2025-12-22 | 21,073 | $43.94 | $925,947.62 |
| 2025-12-19 | 7,699 | $59.33 | $456,781.67 |
| 2025-12-16 | 204 | $59.46 | $12,129.84 |
| 2025-12-15 | 756 | $59.66 | $45,102.96 |
| 2025-12-11 | 5,261 | $58.98 | $310,293.78 |
| 2025-12-05 | 200 | $59.76 | $11,952 |
| 2025-12-04 | 333 | $60.49 | $20,143.17 |
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 LW 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.