MTUS (MTUS)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 4/9. Beneish M-Score of -2.08 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 fundamental economics of MTUS present a stark dichotomy between revenue expansion and profitability efficiency. While the company demonstrates top-line momentum with 6.9% year-over-year growth, this trajectory is undermined by negative net margins at -0.1%, indicating that operational costs are consuming nearly all earnings power despite an 8.2% gross margin floor. The return on invested capital stands at a negligible 0.4%, suggesting the business fails to generate meaningful value relative to its cost of equity, which creates a wide spread against any reasonable WACC estimate and points to significant capital allocation inefficiencies. Although the Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 signals moderate financial stability without recent deterioration in leverage or liquidity, the Beneish M-Score of -2.08 flags potential earnings manipulation risks that warrant heightened scrutiny given the thin profit margins.
Valuation metrics reflect extreme market skepticism regarding future cash flow generation rather than current operational performance. A price-to-earnings multiple of 275.4x is structurally unsustainable for a firm posting negative net income, rendering traditional relative valuation comparisons against sector averages or historical medians mathematically inapplicable without adjusting the denominator to book value or free cash flow. Any discounted cash flow model attempting to derive fair value must assume hyper-aggressive margin expansion and growth acceleration that contradicts current profitability trends; consequently, the market pricing implies a belief in a fundamental business transformation that has not yet materialized in earnings per share. The disconnect between high revenue velocity and negative bottom-line results suggests the stock price is decoupled from near-term cash generation capabilities.
The risk-reward profile appears skewed heavily toward downside volatility given the combination of negative net income, minimal ROIC, and elevated manipulation flags. While insider activity or Fama-French alpha data was not provided to assess specific factor exposure, the inherent structural weaknesses in capital efficiency and profit margins create a fragile equity structure susceptible to mean reversion if growth rates decelerate even marginally. Investors must weigh whether the current valuation premium accounts for speculative upside potential or represents an overextension based on revenue metrics that do not translate into shareholder value creation under standard accounting frameworks.
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.
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 SLYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell MTUS shares regardless of MTUS's individual fundamentals. We estimate $34M of passive capital is structurally linked to MTUS through 5 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on MTUS's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 5 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in MTUS to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If MTUS (MTUS) 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 MTUS. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 5 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
MTUS Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest MTUS Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 5 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
MTUS Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does MTUS convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
MTUS converts -154% 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 254% 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 | 1,691 | $17.93 | $30,319.63 |
| 2026-05-13 | 5,552 | $17.62 | $97,826.24 |
| 2026-05-06 | 133 | $19.28 | $2,564.24 |
| 2026-05-04 | 1 | $19.14 | $19.14 |
| 2026-04-22 | 294 | $18.55 | $5,453.7 |
| 2026-03-23 | 83 | $14.82 | $1,230.06 |
| 2026-03-17 | 2,111 | $14.56 | $30,736.16 |
| 2026-03-16 | 5,867 | $14.68 | $86,127.56 |
| 2026-03-09 | 174 | $16.88 | $2,937.12 |
| 2026-02-19 | 857 | $20.98 | $17,979.86 |
| 2026-02-04 | 2,072 | $21.05 | $43,615.6 |
| 2026-01-28 | 34 | $19.64 | $667.76 |
| 2026-01-27 | 308 | $19.44 | $5,987.52 |
| 2025-12-22 | 500 | $17.46 | $8,730 |
| 2025-12-15 | 3,651 | $18.21 | $66,484.71 |
| 2025-12-05 | 5,495 | $17.31 | $95,118.45 |
| 2025-12-04 | 678 | $17.52 | $11,878.56 |
| 2025-12-01 | 2 | $16.91 | $33.82 |
| 2025-11-06 | 749 | $17.98 | $13,467.02 |
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 MTUS 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.