Meta Platforms, Inc. (META)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicMETA trades at 23.0x earnings, roughly in line with its sector average of 32.1x. Financial health is average: Piotroski 5/9, Altman Z 8.4. DCF fair value of $450 implies 29% downside based on model assumptions.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of Meta Platforms, Inc. demonstrate a powerful engine driven primarily by exceptional margin expansion rather than asset efficiency or leverage. With a Return on Invested Capital significantly exceeding the weighted average cost of capital at an 8.8% spread, the firm generates substantial value creation. The DuPont decomposition reveals that this robust equity return stems almost entirely from a net margin of 30.1%, while asset turnover remains modest at 0.55x and financial leverage sits low at 1.68x. Creditworthiness is further underscored by an Altman Z-Score of 8.7, indicating minimal bankruptcy risk, and the Beneish M-Score of -3.01 suggests earnings are likely free from manipulation. However, a Piotroski F-Score of 5/9 signals that while profitability remains strong, recent financial quality may have deteriorated relative to historical peaks or peers.
Valuation metrics present a mixed picture where current market pricing diverges sharply from intrinsic value models and historical norms. The stock trades at a P/E multiple of 24.4x, which is elevated by approximately 55% compared to its five-year average and remains below the sector median of 27.3x. Despite trading under the peer group mean, a discounted cash flow analysis implies an upside potential of -20.1%, suggesting the market may be pricing in growth rates higher than the model's assumption of 18.4% annual free cash flow expansion over the next decade. This discrepancy indicates that while the multiple is not at historical extremes, the implied valuation gap suggests current prices are rich relative to calculated fair value based on projected fundamentals.
Risk and factor analysis highlights a distinct tilt toward growth characteristics with notable insider caution. The stock exhibits strong momentum through a Fama-French alpha of 16.59% annually and scores positively on the profitability factor, yet it carries a negative exposure to the value factor at -0.343, confirming its classification as a high-growth name rather than a value play. This growth orientation is compounded by significant insider activity over the last ninety days, with net selling totaling $103.9 million. While the company maintains robust profitability and low distress risk, the combination of negative DCF upside, elevated valuation relative to history, and substantial recent insider outflows warrants careful scrutiny regarding future price momentum versus fundamental deterioration.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
Interactive5-year two-stage DCF. Terminal growth 3%. Default sliders match the pre-computed base case. Drag to explore scenarios. Not investment advice.
The growth rate the market implicitly expects over the next 10 years to justify today's price. Compare with historical growth of 22% YoY revenue.
Sensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 10.5% | 12.5% | 14.5% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $527 | $416 | $340 |
| 3% | $585 | $450 | $362 |
| 4% | $661 | $493 | $389 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $597.63.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=12.5%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $450 (-29.1%). Not investment advice.
Valuation Context
Currently trading 47% above its 5-year average P/E of 18.2x.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current price level of $629.86 for Meta Platforms, Inc. sits within a context where institutional positioning can be inferred through the interplay of moving averages and volume dynamics. Recent crossovers between short-term and long-term simple moving averages may suggest that larger market participants are either consolidating their holdings or adjusting exposure levels in response to shifting valuation thresholds. If price action has consistently respected these trend lines with increasing frequency, it could indicate a strengthening consensus among institutional traders regarding the asset's medium-term trajectory. Conversely, any divergence where volume surges while prices stagnate near key average intersections might signal indecision or potential accumulation by sophisticated players waiting for clearer directional confirmation. Volume trends serve as a critical lens through which to view these movements; elevated trading activity coinciding with price breaks above established moving averages often reflects active institutional participation rather than retail speculation alone. Such patterns can imply that larger entities are building positions, anticipating further upside momentum driven by sector-wide factors in the Communication Services space. However, if volume diminishes during upward moves or spikes sharply on downward corrections, it may suggest a lack of sustained institutional support at current levels, potentially leading to increased volatility as bigger players recalibrate their risk profiles. The absence of definitive trend continuation signals means that while some institutions appear engaged, others might be hedging against potential reversals, creating a complex landscape where market direction remains contingent on upcoming catalysts and broader macroeconomic conditions affecting the technology sector.
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
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.
Dividend History
| Date | Amount | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-16 | $0.5250 | 0.0% |
| 2025-12-15 | $0.5250 | 0.0% |
| 2025-09-22 | $0.5250 | 0.0% |
| 2025-06-16 | $0.5250 | 0.0% |
| 2025-03-14 | $0.5250 | +5.0% |
| 2024-12-16 | $0.5000 | 0.0% |
| 2024-09-16 | $0.5000 | 0.0% |
| 2024-06-14 | $0.5000 | 0.0% |
| 2024-02-21 | $0.5000 | — |
Dividend and split data from SEC filings and market data. Amounts are per share, not adjusted for splits. Source: yfinance.
Risk Profile
Sharpe = risk-adjusted return (higher is better). Max drawdown = largest peak-to-trough decline. 1,200+ trading days.
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.
Fama-French 5-Factor Exposure
Academic factor model decomposition — what's really driving this stock's returns.
Fama-French 5-Factor Model. Data: Kenneth French Data Library. Regression over 3 years of daily returns.
Fundamentals
SEC Filings & Material Events
Full financial overview
Significant news
Significant news
Significant news
Significant news
10-K Risk Factor Expansion
Word count of Item 1A (Risk Factors) across annual filings. Rising counts often signal new regulatory, competitive, or operational risks.
Smart Money Flow
Institutional 13F filings from top hedge funds. Positions updated quarterly from SEC EDGAR.
| Fund | Quarter | Shares Change | % Change | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DE Shaw | 2026-Q1 | +278,423 | +32.7% | Increased |
| Tiger Global | 2026-Q1 | +336,249 | +12.2% | Increased |
| Appaloosa Management | 2026-Q1 | -163,500 | -27.3% | Decreased |
| Two Sigma Investments | 2026-Q1 | -16,000 | -13.6% | Decreased |
| Soros Fund Management | 2026-Q1 | +34,607 | +100.0% | New Position |
| Millennium Management | 2026-Q1 | -1,671,300 | -52.8% | Decreased |
| Point72 Asset Mgmt | 2026-Q1 | +22,300 | +25.2% | Increased |
| Citadel Advisors | 2026-Q1 | +728,600 | +9.0% | Increased |
| Renaissance Technologies | 2026-Q1 | +253,373 | +100.0% | New Position |
| Bridgewater Associates | 2026-Q1 | +67,964 | +30.4% | Increased |
| Citadel Advisors | 2025-Q4 | +275,000 | +3.5% | Increased |
| Bridgewater Associates | 2025-Q4 | -193,218 | -46.3% | Decreased |
Source: SEC 13F-HR filings. 13F data is delayed ~45 days after quarter end. Not investment advice.
Passive Flow Attribution
ETF Draft EffectWhen investors buy or sell ETFs like VOX or XLC, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell META shares regardless of Meta Platforms, Inc.'s individual fundamentals. We estimate $167.1B of passive capital is structurally linked to META through 8 tracked ETFs. This substantial passive exposure means that ETF inflows and outflows — not company fundamentals — can dominate daily volume on this stock.
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 Meta Platforms, Inc. to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies NVIDIA Corp (NVDA) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with META. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 44 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
META Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 8 META shares, reducing daily market volatility.
Meta Platforms, Inc. (META) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 20.3% of the VOX (VOX) and 13.5% of the State Street Communication Services Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLC). Across 36 tracked ETFs, approximately 270M shares (12.3% of float) are held by passive funds and rarely trade on the open market. This level of passive ownership means index rebalances can create outsized volume events.
ETFs with Highest META Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 36 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
META Institutional Volume Profile
252-day volume distribution by price level. The Point of Control (POC) marks — the price where the most institutional volume transacted — an implicit support/resistance floor.
The highest-volume price zone for Meta Platforms, Inc. over the past year sits near $664.53 (12% of 252-day volume). The current price of $597.63 sits 10.1% below the POC — suggesting potential mean-reversion upside if institutional demand reasserts at this level. The highly concentrated volume profile (12% at POC) indicates strong consensus on fair value — institutional participants have repeatedly transacted near this price.
Volume Profile computed from 252 trading days of OHLCV data. Volume allocated to price bins proportionally based on daily high-low range. Not investment advice.
META Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does Meta Platforms, Inc. convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
Meta Platforms, Inc. converts 44% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The 56% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 8.7% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 401 | $616.63 | $247,268.63 |
| 2026-05-13 | 105 | $603.00 | $63,315 |
| 2026-05-12 | 1 | $598.86 | $598.86 |
| 2026-05-11 | 264 | $609.63 | $160,942.32 |
| 2026-05-07 | 101 | $612.88 | $61,900.88 |
| 2026-05-06 | 118 | $604.96 | $71,385.28 |
| 2026-05-05 | 153 | $610.41 | $93,392.73 |
| 2026-05-04 | 138 | $608.75 | $84,007.5 |
| 2026-04-29 | 514 | $671.34 | $345,068.76 |
| 2026-04-28 | 3,384 | $678.62 | $2.3M |
| 2026-04-27 | 10,055 | $675.03 | $6.8M |
| 2026-04-20 | 11,885 | $688.55 | $8.2M |
| 2026-04-17 | 540 | $676.87 | $365,509.8 |
| 2026-04-16 | 5,401 | $671.58 | $3.6M |
| 2026-04-15 | 1,807 | $662.49 | $1.2M |
| 2026-04-14 | 201 | $634.53 | $127,540.53 |
| 2026-04-13 | 13,181 | $629.86 | $8.3M |
| 2026-04-10 | 9,351 | $628.39 | $5.9M |
| 2026-04-09 | 8,340 | $612.42 | $5.1M |
| 2026-04-08 | 6,240 | $575.05 | $3.6M |
| 2026-04-07 | 7,076 | $573.02 | $4.1M |
| 2026-04-02 | 707 | $579.23 | $409,515.61 |
| 2026-03-31 | 53,748 | $536.38 | $28.8M |
| 2026-03-30 | 100 | $525.72 | $52,572 |
| 2026-03-26 | 7 | $594.89 | $4,164.23 |
| 2026-03-25 | 394 | $592.92 | $233,610.48 |
| 2026-03-23 | 49,948 | $593.66 | $29.7M |
| 2026-03-19 | 50 | $615.68 | $30,784 |
| 2026-03-17 | 5 | $627.45 | $3,137.25 |
| 2026-03-12 | 800 | $654.86 | $523,888 |
Source: SEC Regulation SHO FTD data. Data is reported with a ~30 day delay. High FTD quantities relative to average daily volume may indicate settlement stress.
Institutional Holdings (13F Filings)
Raw SEC 13F-HR filings from institutional investment managers. Shows exact share counts and portfolio values as reported to the SEC.
| Fund | Quarter | Shares | Value ($K) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Citadel Advisors | 2026-Q1 | 8,814,900 | $5,043,268,737K |
| Tiger Global | 2026-Q1 | 3,086,864 | $1,766,087,500K |
| Millennium Management | 2026-Q1 | 1,494,900 | $855,277,137K |
| DE Shaw | 2026-Q1 | 1,130,856 | $646,996,643K |
| Appaloosa Management | 2026-Q1 | 436,500 | $249,734,745K |
| Bridgewater Associates | 2026-Q1 | 291,665 | $166,870,296K |
| Renaissance Technologies | 2026-Q1 | 253,373 | $144,961,379K |
| Point72 Asset Mgmt | 2026-Q1 | 110,800 | $63,392,004K |
| Two Sigma Investments | 2026-Q1 | 101,900 | $58,300,047K |
| Soros Fund Management | 2026-Q1 | 34,607 | $19,799,703K |
| Citadel Advisors | 2025-Q4 | 8,086,300 | $5,337,685,767K |
| Millennium Management | 2025-Q4 | 3,166,200 | $2,089,976,958K |
| Tiger Global | 2025-Q4 | 2,750,615 | $1,815,653,455K |
| DE Shaw | 2025-Q4 | 852,433 | $562,682,499K |
| Appaloosa Management | 2025-Q4 | 600,000 | $396,054,000K |
Source: SEC 13F-HR filings. Values reported in thousands. 13F data is delayed ~45 days after quarter end.
Price Correlations
Statistical correlation of daily returns with other stocks. High correlations indicate stocks that move together; negative correlations can offer diversification.
| Peer | 252-Day (1Y) | 126-Day (6M) | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| WTGXX | NaN | NaN | |
| AMZN | 0.533 | 0.447 | Moderate |
| CVNA | 0.496 | 0.476 | Moderate |
| MOD | 0.489 | 0.466 | Moderate |
| XYL | 0.469 | 0.359 | Moderate |
| SHOP | 0.452 | 0.466 | Moderate |
| VSEC | 0.449 | 0.444 | Moderate |
| NVDA | 0.443 | 0.410 | Moderate |
| SOFI | 0.437 | 0.392 | Moderate |
| RBLX | 0.433 | 0.395 | Moderate |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare META to Peers
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-02.
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.