MDU (MDU)

$4.2B
Market Cap
22.2
P/E Ratio
0.39
Beta
2.67%
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 4/9Altman Z 1.1 DistressBeneish M -2.71 CleanROIC−WACC -2.9%

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

Financial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 1.1.

Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.

Algorithmic Teardown

AI-Generated

The company's capital allocation efficiency appears constrained, as indicated by a low Return on Invested Capital of 3.6%, which suggests limited value creation relative to the cost of equity despite a moderate Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 signaling average financial strength. The DuPont decomposition reveals that earnings per share are primarily driven by robust net margins at 10.2% rather than operational efficiency or leverage, evidenced by a low asset turnover ratio of 0.25x and an equity multiplier of only 2.75x. While the negative Beneish M-Score of -2.71 points to low earnings manipulation risk, the combination of sluggish ROIC and modest revenue growth of 6.7% implies that current profitability is not expanding rapidly enough to justify significant multiple expansion without improved asset productivity or margin acceleration.

Valuation metrics currently reflect a premium stance relative to historical norms and sector peers, with a price-to-earnings ratio of 22.2x suggesting the market prices in expectations for sustained high-margin performance rather than growth via volume. This valuation compression occurs despite the absence of explicit DCF fair value calculations or implied growth rates in the provided dataset, indicating that investors are likely relying on the stability offered by double-digit margins to offset concerns over capital efficiency. The disconnect between a P/E multiple exceeding 20x and an ROIC below 4% creates a structural tension where earnings yield lags behind the cost of equity, potentially limiting upside unless operating leverage improves or asset turnover accelerates significantly in future periods.

Insider activity provides a modest counterweight to valuation concerns, with $104,225 net buying over the last ninety days indicating some internal confidence despite the mixed fundamental profile. However, without additional data on Fama-French alpha factors or specific risk factor deltas, it remains unclear whether this insider flow compensates for the capital allocation inefficiencies highlighted by the low ROIC. The synthesis of these signals suggests a scenario where earnings quality is defensible due to strong margins and clean accounting scores, yet total shareholder return potential may be capped until the firm can demonstrate better deployment of its asset base or achieve higher growth rates that justify the current equity premium.

Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

4/9
Piotroski F-Score
Average — mixed operational signals
1.1
Altman Z-Score
Distress Zone — below 1.8 threshold per academic model. Thresholds: >3 safe, 1.8–3 grey, <1.8 distress.
-2.71
Beneish M-Score
Below threshold — no statistical earnings quality concern per Beneish model. Threshold: <-2.22 = below threshold.

Profitability & Value Creation

32.6%
Gross Margin
10.2%
Net Margin
3.6%
ROIC
6.5%
WACC
ROIC − WACC Spread: -2.9%— Negative spread.
+6.7%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
-32.3%
Earnings Growth (YoY)
-297.0M
Free Cash Flow

DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition

Breaking down Return on Equity to see how the company generates its ROE — efficiency, margins, or leverage.

10.2%
Net Profit Margin
NI ÷ Revenue
×
0.25x
Asset Turnover
Revenue ÷ Assets
×
2.75x
Equity Multiplier
Assets ÷ Equity
=
6.9%
Return on Equity
Balanced ROE composition across margins, turnover, and leverage.

Balance Sheet Health

1.75x
Debt / Equity
0.84x
Current Ratio
3.0x
Interest Coverage
4.8x
Net Debt / EBITDA
-4.42%
FCF Yield
525.4M
EBITDA

Insider Activity (Last 90 Days)

Net Insider Flow
+$104,225
Net Buying
1
Buy Transactions
0
Sale Transactions
2026-02-17JOHNSON ROB LGrant5,830 shares
2026-02-17SENGER GARRETGrant6,920 shares
2026-02-17FOTI ANTHONY DONALDGrant8,161 shares
2026-02-17BOESE DYKEGrant3,702 shares
2026-02-17VOLLMER JASON LGrant15,229 shares

Open-market buys vs sells by company insiders. Source: yfinance.

Earnings Surprise History

Q4
✓ Beat
Est: $0.36
Act: $0.40
+10.2%
Q3
✗ Miss
Est: $0.13
Act: $0.07
-44.5%
Q2
✗ Miss
Est: $0.11
Act: $0.09
-15.9%
Q1
✓ Beat
Est: $0.36
Act: $0.37
+2.7%

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.

Loading drawdown chart...

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.

Loading beta chart...
Rolling Beta Market (β = 1.0)

Fundamentals

19.4
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
1.52
Price/Book
2M
Avg Volume
$21.49
52W High
$15.04
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$170M
Tracked Passive Exposure
8
ETFs Holding MDU
0.09%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$194B
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like SLYV or VPU, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell MDU shares regardless of MDU's individual fundamentals. We estimate $170M of passive capital is structurally linked to MDU through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on MDU'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 MDU to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

MDU Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
MDUEpicenterVYMETFVBRETFSPSMETFNEEHigh RiskSOHigh RiskDUKHigh RiskCEGMed RiskAEPHigh Risk
MDU Price Drop (%)0

If MDU (MDU) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies NextEra Energy Inc. (NEE) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with MDU. 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.

MDU Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
MDU

Float lock-up computed from 9 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

MDU Capital Efficiency

How efficiently does MDU convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.

Free Cash Flow
$-297,029,000
EBITDA
$525M
FCF Conversion
-57%
Reinvestment Rate
157%
-57% of EBITDA → Free Cash
0% (cash burn)25% (low)50% (efficient)100% (pure cash)
ROIC
3.6%
ROIC − WACC Spread
-2.8%

MDU converts -57% 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 157% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-2.8%), 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.

DateFailed SharesClose PriceNotional Value
2026-05-122,877$22.80$65,595.6
2026-05-1166$22.49$1,484.34
2026-05-0866$22.47$1,483.02
2026-05-075,491$22.31$122,504.21
2026-05-0697$22.46$2,178.62
2026-04-24281$21.94$6,165.14
2026-04-231,565$21.32$33,365.8
2026-04-1559$22.00$1,298
2026-04-14135$21.69$2,928.15
2026-04-1315$22.34$335.1
2026-04-0644,549$21.32$949,784.68
2026-04-01423$20.72$8,764.56
2026-03-27170$20.63$3,507.1
2026-03-26620$20.55$12,741
2026-03-235$19.65$98.25
2026-03-121,952$20.97$40,933.44
2026-03-111,632$21.02$34,304.64
2026-03-057,043$20.85$146,846.55
2026-02-27244$20.44$4,987.36
2026-02-26100$20.38$2,038
2026-02-11699$20.32$14,203.68
2026-02-1025,572$20.12$514,508.64
2026-02-0626$20.16$524.16
2025-12-318,625$19.74$170,257.5
2025-12-306,965$19.78$137,767.7
2025-12-298,475$19.68$166,788
2025-12-261,650$19.64$32,406
2025-12-23394$19.47$7,671.18
2025-12-181,287$19.39$24,954.93
2025-12-1649$19.56$958.44

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 MDU 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.