MTDR (MTDR)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 5/9, Altman Z 1.9.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe company demonstrates a robust quality profile anchored by an ROIC of 9.2%, indicating capital efficiency that likely exceeds the cost of equity for many peers, while maintaining strong profitability metrics with a net margin of 20.8% and gross margin expanding to 45.8%. The DuPont decomposition reveals that earnings power is primarily driven by high operating leverage rather than asset turnover or financial leverage; specifically, the 12.7% ROE stems from superior margins (20.8%) amplified moderately by a 1.95x equity multiplier and modest asset turnover of 0.31x. Fundamental integrity appears solid given a Piotroski F-Score of 5/9 and a Beneish M-Score of -3.25, the latter suggesting low probability of financial manipulation despite revenue growth moderating at just 5.1% year-over-year.
Valuation metrics present a compelling divergence between historical norms and current pricing, with a forward P/E of 10.8x trading significantly below typical expansion multiples for firms exhibiting such margin profiles. While the DCF model implies fair value based on these margins, the market appears to be pricing in slower growth trajectories or sector-specific headwinds that are not fully reflected in the low multiple relative to its earnings yield. This discount creates a potential mean-reversion opportunity if revenue acceleration resumes, though the current 5.1% growth rate suggests the stock is being valued as a value play rather than a high-growth equity despite its efficient capital structure.
Insider activity provides a nuanced counterpoint to the valuation narrative; over the last ninety days, insiders have executed $38,326 in net buying, signaling moderate confidence from management or key stakeholders at these price levels. However, this flow is relatively small compared to typical institutional accumulation patterns for undervalued names, suggesting that while internal parties see merit, there may be limited aggressive conviction driving a broader re-rating absent significant catalysts like accelerated revenue expansion or margin improvement beyond current baselines.
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
✅ 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.
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 XOP or MDYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell MTDR shares regardless of MTDR's individual fundamentals. We estimate $578M of passive capital is structurally linked to MTDR through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on MTDR'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 MTDR to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If MTDR (MTDR) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with MTDR. 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.
MTDR Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest MTDR Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 13 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
MTDR Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does MTDR convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
MTDR converts 10% 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 90% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 0.0% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-07 | 6,524 | $57.76 | $376,826.24 |
| 2026-05-06 | 12,726 | $62.93 | $800,847.18 |
| 2026-05-05 | 191 | $63.82 | $12,189.62 |
| 2026-05-04 | 3,503 | $62.36 | $218,447.08 |
| 2026-04-20 | 26 | $55.60 | $1,445.6 |
| 2026-04-14 | 147 | $60.31 | $8,865.57 |
| 2026-04-09 | 5,306 | $60.34 | $320,164.04 |
| 2026-04-08 | 1,211 | $64.49 | $78,097.39 |
| 2026-03-27 | 1 | $64.20 | $64.2 |
| 2026-03-23 | 391 | $58.50 | $22,873.5 |
| 2026-03-17 | 12,268 | $56.36 | $691,424.48 |
| 2026-03-13 | 15,878 | $56.16 | $891,708.48 |
| 2026-03-11 | 92 | $54.48 | $5,012.16 |
| 2026-03-10 | 14,014 | $56.15 | $786,886.1 |
| 2026-03-02 | 197 | $51.40 | $10,125.8 |
| 2026-02-27 | 47,626 | $49.62 | $2.4M |
| 2026-02-17 | 47 | $47.80 | $2,246.6 |
| 2026-02-13 | 54,496 | $46.84 | $2.6M |
| 2026-01-23 | 1,584 | $43.15 | $68,349.6 |
| 2026-01-02 | 45 | $42.44 | $1,909.8 |
| 2025-12-26 | 45 | $41.73 | $1,877.85 |
| 2025-12-19 | 14,375 | $40.91 | $588,081.25 |
| 2025-12-12 | 5,038 | $44.89 | $226,155.82 |
| 2025-12-09 | 345 | $44.42 | $15,324.9 |
| 2025-12-04 | 2,550 | $44.28 | $112,914 |
| 2025-11-26 | 875 | $41.23 | $36,076.25 |
| 2025-11-14 | 2,378 | $40.80 | $97,022.4 |
| 2025-11-12 | 97,835 | $40.54 | $4.0M |
| 2025-11-06 | 6,042 | $37.19 | $224,701.98 |
| 2025-10-30 | 94 | $39.70 | $3,731.8 |
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 MTDR 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.