MP (MP)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 3.8. Beneish M-Score of 0.14 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 severe fundamental deterioration, characterized by a negative ROIC of -1.9% that falls drastically short of the 14.1% weighted average cost of capital, resulting in a destructive spread of -16.0%. This economic inefficiency is reinforced by deteriorating profitability metrics, with both gross and net margins contracting to -25.7% and -38.3%, respectively. While revenue growth remains positive at 10.1%, the Altman Z-Score of 3.8 indicates a moderate safety margin against bankruptcy rather than robust financial health, whereas the Beneish M-Score of 0.14 suggests earnings are not currently flagged for potential manipulation. The Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 reflects marginal fundamental strength but fails to signal an improving trajectory in this distressed environment.
Valuation analysis is complicated by the negative earnings profile; consequently, traditional P/E comparisons against historical averages or sector peers become mathematically non-functional and potentially misleading without adjusting for normalized cash flows. The market's pricing of these assets must be evaluated through a DCF lens that explicitly accounts for the high cost of capital relative to value creation, implying that current valuations likely embed significant downside risk unless operational leverage improves drastically to turn negative margins positive. Any implied growth rate derived from such metrics would need substantial upward revision to justify existing price levels given the widening gap between returns generated and costs incurred by the firm.
Risk assessment highlights a precarious position where the divergence between capital deployment efficiency and cost of funds creates a compounding drag on equity value. The combination of negative spreads, shrinking margins, and only moderate credit safety suggests that future performance hinges entirely on reversing operational losses rather than incremental growth. Investors must weigh whether the 10.1% revenue expansion can eventually translate into profitability before the capital structure becomes unsustainable under the current cost of debt profile.
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
Balance Sheet Health
Earnings Surprise History
EPS estimates vs actuals for the most recent reported quarters. 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.
Fundamentals
Passive Flow Attribution
ETF Draft EffectWhen investors buy or sell ETFs like XME or VAW, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell MP shares regardless of MP's individual fundamentals. We estimate $776M of passive capital is structurally linked to MP through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on MP'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 MP to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If MP (MP) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Linde plc (LIN) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with MP. 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.
MP Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 14 MP shares, reducing daily market volatility.
MP (MP) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 4.2% of the XME (XME) and 0.6% of the VAW (VAW). Across 12 tracked ETFs, approximately 13M shares (7.3% of float) are held by passive funds and rarely trade on the open market. As passive ownership grows, index inclusion changes may increasingly drive price discovery.
ETFs with Highest MP Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 12 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
MP 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 MP over the past year sits near $62.19 (18% of 252-day volume). The current price of $72.24 trades 16.2% above this institutional floor — a sign of upside momentum, though a pullback to the POC zone is a common reversion target. The highly concentrated volume profile (18% 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.
MP Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does MP convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
MP converts -11033% 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 11133% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-16.0%), 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.
| Date | Failed Shares | Close Price | Notional Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 210,583 | $63.73 | $13.4M |
| 2026-05-11 | 15,954 | $67.43 | $1.1M |
| 2026-05-08 | 21,471 | $69.13 | $1.5M |
| 2026-05-07 | 7,972 | $72.65 | $579,165.8 |
| 2026-05-06 | 20,273 | $68.06 | $1.4M |
| 2026-05-05 | 1,032 | $66.20 | $68,318.4 |
| 2026-05-04 | 9,383 | $66.63 | $625,189.29 |
| 2026-05-01 | 2,748 | $66.04 | $181,477.92 |
| 2026-04-30 | 3,020 | $61.30 | $185,126 |
| 2026-04-28 | 415 | $64.92 | $26,941.8 |
| 2026-04-27 | 358 | $60.73 | $21,741.34 |
| 2026-04-24 | 651 | $63.32 | $41,221.32 |
| 2026-04-23 | 6,493 | $69.19 | $449,250.67 |
| 2026-04-22 | 4,120 | $65.76 | $270,931.2 |
| 2026-04-21 | 12,864 | $66.23 | $851,982.72 |
| 2026-04-20 | 56,455 | $60.99 | $3.4M |
| 2026-04-15 | 36,129 | $57.36 | $2.1M |
| 2026-04-14 | 29,650 | $56.80 | $1.7M |
| 2026-04-13 | 174,006 | $55.24 | $9.6M |
| 2026-04-10 | 109,771 | $53.90 | $5.9M |
| 2026-04-09 | 822 | $54.44 | $44,749.68 |
| 2026-04-07 | 20,702 | $51.17 | $1.1M |
| 2026-04-06 | 77,432 | $49.73 | $3.9M |
| 2026-04-02 | 1,602 | $48.41 | $77,552.82 |
| 2026-04-01 | 19,690 | $48.26 | $950,239.4 |
| 2026-03-31 | 227 | $45.59 | $10,348.93 |
| 2026-03-30 | 11,948 | $51.80 | $618,906.4 |
| 2026-03-26 | 4 | $53.74 | $214.96 |
| 2026-03-24 | 4,710 | $53.28 | $250,948.8 |
| 2026-03-23 | 29,169 | $50.60 | $1.5M |
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.
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 | |
| USAR | 0.622 | 0.720 | Moderate |
| LEU | 0.418 | 0.632 | Moderate |
| UEC | 0.385 | 0.641 | Moderate |
| ASTS | 0.379 | 0.548 | Moderate |
| ONDS | 0.369 | 0.521 | Moderate |
| ACHR | 0.306 | 0.575 | Moderate |
| BWXT | 0.285 | 0.509 | Low correlation |
| UAL | 0.279 | 0.262 | Low correlation |
| RKLB | 0.278 | 0.520 | Low correlation |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare MP 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.