MEDP (MEDP)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 6.8 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of MEDP reveal a robust capital allocation efficiency, evidenced by an ROIC-WACC spread of +53.2%, indicating the company generates returns on invested capital significantly exceeding its cost of equity. This high-quality earnings profile is further corroborated by a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 and a Beneish M-Score of -2.87, which collectively signal strong financial health with minimal likelihood of earnings manipulation. The DuPont decomposition suggests that the elevated ROE is primarily driven by operational leverage rather than excessive debt or margin compression, as reflected in healthy gross margins of 30.1% and net margins of 17.8%. Additionally, revenue growth accelerating at a 20.0% annual rate supports the sustainability of these profitability metrics without relying on aggressive balance sheet expansion, while an Altman Z-Score of 6.8 places the firm well within the safe zone for bankruptcy risk assessment.
Valuation multiples currently stand at 30.0x forward earnings, a premium that must be weighed against the implied growth rate embedded in the DCF fair value model suggesting a target price of $547. This multiple expansion is not merely speculative; it appears justified by the combination of double-digit revenue acceleration and superior capital efficiency relative to peers where such spreads are typically compressed. However, the market's willingness to pay this premium assumes that current margin trends persist and that future cash flows will materialize in line with the high-growth assumptions required to bridge the gap between current pricing and intrinsic value derived from discounted cash flow analysis.
While specific risk factor deltas or insider activity data were not provided for synthesis, the combination of a high Piotroski score and low Beneish M-score mitigates typical fundamental risks associated with earnings quality. The primary uncertainty lies in whether the market's valuation ceiling can sustain itself if revenue growth decelerates from its current 20.0% trajectory or if margin compression occurs despite the company's strong operating leverage. Investors must determine if the implied return profile justifies the elevated multiple relative to historical norms and sector averages, balancing the safety of low distress probability against the sensitivity of valuation to growth assumptions.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 11.7% | 13.7% | 15.7% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $628 | $511 | $429 |
| 3% | $684 | $547 | $453 |
| 4% | $755 | $589 | $481 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=13.7%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $547 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
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 MDYG or VFQY, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell MEDP shares regardless of MEDP's individual fundamentals. We estimate $590M of passive capital is structurally linked to MEDP through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on MEDP'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 MEDP to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If MEDP (MEDP) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies FLEX LTD (FLEX) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with MEDP. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 13 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
MEDP Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest MEDP Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 13 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
MEDP Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does MEDP convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
MEDP converts 121% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 53.2% 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 | 506 | $428.71 | $216,927.26 |
| 2026-05-04 | 7 | $417.54 | $2,922.78 |
| 2026-05-01 | 800 | $418.66 | $334,928 |
| 2026-04-29 | 2,466 | $409.65 | $1.0M |
| 2026-04-22 | 5 | $514.90 | $2,574.5 |
| 2026-04-20 | 110 | $520.60 | $57,266 |
| 2026-04-17 | 25 | $515.65 | $12,891.25 |
| 2026-04-10 | 4 | $501.50 | $2,006 |
| 2026-04-08 | 19 | $508.52 | $9,661.88 |
| 2026-04-07 | 4 | $496.00 | $1,984 |
| 2026-03-27 | 55 | $466.60 | $25,663 |
| 2026-03-23 | 2 | $452.51 | $905.02 |
| 2026-03-20 | 43 | $460.92 | $19,819.56 |
| 2026-03-09 | 240 | $470.59 | $112,941.6 |
| 2026-03-06 | 4 | $469.38 | $1,877.52 |
| 2026-02-12 | 78 | $423.93 | $33,066.54 |
| 2026-02-04 | 126 | $568.53 | $71,634.78 |
| 2026-02-03 | 16 | $588.17 | $9,410.72 |
| 2026-01-27 | 27,119 | $602.06 | $16.3M |
| 2026-01-21 | 1 | $602.40 | $602.4 |
| 2025-12-24 | 985 | $569.70 | $561,154.5 |
| 2025-12-05 | 18 | $544.77 | $9,805.86 |
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 MEDP 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.