MT (MT)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency of MT is notably constrained, with a Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) of 4.4% that fails to generate value above the cost of equity. This weakness stems from an ROE decomposition where low net margins at 5.1% and sluggish asset turnover of 0.63x are partially offset by leverage, as indicated by an Equity Multiplier of 1.73x driving a total ROE of only 5.6%. While the Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 suggests moderate financial strength relative to peers, the Beneish M-Score of -2.39 indicates low earnings manipulation risk, yet this is juxtaposed against negative revenue growth of -1.7% and gross margins compressed to 7.1%, signaling deteriorating operational fundamentals rather than aggressive accounting practices.
Valuation metrics present a stark divergence between market pricing and intrinsic value estimates derived from discounted cash flow analysis. The current share price implies significant downside potential relative to the calculated DCF fair value of $1, suggesting the market is not currently discounting for extreme distress but may be overvaluing an asset with declining top-line momentum and thin profit spreads. This gap highlights a scenario where traditional valuation multiples likely do not reflect the underlying erosion in revenue generation capacity, leaving investors exposed if growth does not reverse quickly enough to justify current equity levels.
The risk-reward profile appears skewed toward downside protection given the negative revenue trajectory and sub-par capital returns, despite the absence of red flags regarding earnings integrity per the Beneish score. The combination of shrinking revenues and an ROIC that barely clears hurdle rates creates a fragile economic moat where small shifts in operating leverage or margin compression could further erode shareholder value.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $2 | $0 | $0 |
| 3% | $3 | $1 | $0 |
| 4% | $5 | $2 | $0 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $1 (+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 VGK or SPDW, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell MT shares regardless of MT's individual fundamentals. We estimate $755M of passive capital is structurally linked to MT through 6 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on MT's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 6 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in MT to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If MT (MT) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies ASML Holding NV (ASML) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 3 ETFs with MT. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 6 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
MT Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest MT Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 6 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
MT Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does MT convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
MT converts 7% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a low conversion rate suggesting heavy reinvestment. This may indicate a growth phase (building capacity) or structural capital intensity. The 93% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion.
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 | 21,038 | $64.47 | $1.4M |
| 2026-05-13 | 72 | $62.00 | $4,464 |
| 2026-05-12 | 2,045 | $62.34 | $127,485.3 |
| 2026-05-07 | 115,577 | $63.09 | $7.3M |
| 2026-05-06 | 92 | $58.18 | $5,352.56 |
| 2026-05-05 | 12,432 | $55.39 | $688,608.48 |
| 2026-05-01 | 454,035 | $57.21 | $26.0M |
| 2026-04-28 | 251 | $59.03 | $14,816.53 |
| 2026-04-20 | 279,975 | $62.06 | $17.4M |
| 2026-04-06 | 102 | $52.92 | $5,397.84 |
| 2026-04-02 | 267 | $54.03 | $14,426.01 |
| 2026-04-01 | 327 | $51.98 | $16,997.46 |
| 2026-03-25 | 31 | $52.36 | $1,623.16 |
| 2026-03-24 | 233 | $51.65 | $12,034.45 |
| 2026-03-23 | 100 | $47.76 | $4,776 |
| 2026-03-19 | 3,129 | $51.41 | $160,861.89 |
| 2026-03-18 | 15,498 | $52.16 | $808,375.68 |
| 2026-03-12 | 49,874 | $56.64 | $2.8M |
| 2026-03-11 | 8,902 | $56.77 | $505,366.54 |
| 2026-03-09 | 283 | $55.40 | $15,678.2 |
| 2026-03-05 | 81 | $61.16 | $4,953.96 |
| 2026-03-04 | 6,431 | $60.07 | $386,310.17 |
| 2026-03-02 | 175,766 | $65.16 | $11.5M |
| 2026-02-27 | 1,701 | $65.87 | $112,044.87 |
| 2026-02-25 | 118,466 | $65.19 | $7.7M |
| 2026-02-20 | 11,771 | $64.45 | $758,640.95 |
| 2026-02-19 | 9,882 | $65.12 | $643,515.84 |
| 2026-02-13 | 17,400 | $61.59 | $1.1M |
| 2026-02-10 | 32,668 | $62.08 | $2.0M |
| 2026-02-09 | 41,901 | $61.30 | $2.6M |
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 MT 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.