NRP (NRP)

$1.6B
Market Cap
12.3
P/E Ratio
0.23
Beta
2.41%
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 4/9Altman Z 9.5 SafeROIC−WACC +8.0%

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

Financial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 9.5.

Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.

Algorithmic Teardown

AI-Generated

The company exhibits a robust fundamental profile characterized by an ROIC-WACC spread of 8.0%, indicating capital allocations that significantly outpace the cost of equity and debt financing. This efficiency is underpinned by exceptional profitability, evidenced by a net margin of 67.4% driving a DuPont-decomposed ROE of 21.6%. However, this high return stems primarily from pricing power rather than operational velocity or leverage; asset turnover sits at just 0.27x while the equity multiplier remains conservative at 1.18x. Financial stability appears strong with an Altman Z-Score of 9.5, suggesting a low probability of bankruptcy, yet the Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 signals potential weakness in financial health trends or asset quality relative to its peers.

Valuation metrics present a dichotomy between current multiples and underlying growth dynamics. The stock trades at a P/E ratio of 12.3x, which requires contextualization against historical averages and sector benchmarks not provided here, but the multiple implies market skepticism regarding future earnings sustainability given the -17.4% revenue decline year-over-year. While the high margins support current profitability, the contraction in top-line growth suggests that the DCF fair value model would likely hinge on assumptions about margin expansion or a turnaround in volume rather than organic sales acceleration. The absence of insider trading activity over the last 90 days further indicates a neutral stance from management regarding near-term catalysts.

The risk-reward landscape is defined by this tension between superior capital efficiency and deteriorating revenue trends. While the Altman Z-Score mitigates immediate solvency concerns, the declining sales trajectory combined with a middling Piotroski score introduces uncertainty about whether current margins can be sustained without significant margin compression or increased leverage to boost asset turnover. Investors must weigh whether the 8% spread in capital returns is sufficient compensation for the revenue headwinds and the lack of clear insider conviction driving future performance.

Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

4/9
Piotroski F-Score
Average — mixed operational signals
9.5
Altman Z-Score
Safe Zone — above 3.0 threshold per academic model. Thresholds: >3 safe, 1.8–3 grey, <1.8 distress.

Profitability & Value Creation

67.4%
Net Margin
15.9%
ROIC
8.0%
WACC
ROIC − WACC Spread: +8.0%— Positive value creation spread.
-17.4%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
-25.7%
Earnings Growth (YoY)

DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition

Breaking down Return on Equity to see how the company generates its ROE — efficiency, margins, or leverage.

67.4%
Net Profit Margin
NI ÷ Revenue
×
0.27x
Asset Turnover
Revenue ÷ Assets
×
1.18x
Equity Multiplier
Assets ÷ Equity
=
21.6%
Return on Equity
✅ ROE driven primarily by strong profit margins — a sign of pricing power.

Balance Sheet Health

0.18x
Debt / Equity
1.85x
Current Ratio
18.1x
Interest Coverage
-0.1x
Net Debt / EBITDA
159.3M
EBITDA

Earnings Surprise History

Q3
✗ Miss
Est: $1.60
Act: $0.52
-67.5%
Q2
✗ Miss
Est: $0.25
Act: $0.15
-40.3%
Q1
✓ Beat
Est: $0.30
Act: $0.58
+94.7%

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.

Loading drawdown chart...

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.

Loading beta chart...
Rolling Beta Market (β = 1.0)

Fundamentals

41.3
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
2.62
Price/Book
45196
Avg Volume
$128.60
52W High
$86.83
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$97M
Tracked Passive Exposure
5
ETFs Holding NRP
0.06%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$175B
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like VNQI or DEM, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell NRP shares regardless of NRP's individual fundamentals. We estimate $97M of passive capital is structurally linked to NRP through 5 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on NRP'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 NRP to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

NRP Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
NRPEpicenterVWOETFSPEMETFVNQIETF2330UnknownTSMLow Risk939UnknownGMGUnknownWTGXXUnknown
NRP Price Drop (%)0

If NRP (NRP) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (2330) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with NRP. 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.

NRP Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
NRP

Float lock-up computed from 5 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

Fails-to-Deliver (FTD) History

SEC-reported settlement failures. Elevated FTDs can indicate high short-selling pressure, operational settlement issues, or naked shorting activity.

DateFailed SharesClose PriceNotional Value
2026-05-145,739$107.13$614,819.07
2026-05-1211$110.12$1,211.32
2026-03-251,750$125.40$219,450
2026-03-17409$116.77$47,758.93
2026-03-12104$119.33$12,410.32
2026-03-06208$119.65$24,887.2
2026-03-022,387$121.05$288,946.35
2026-02-1958$123.23$7,147.34
2026-02-04456$118.27$53,931.12
2026-02-024$113.50$454
2026-01-281,268$113.97$144,513.96
2026-01-271,256$114.09$143,297.04
2026-01-21101$119.02$12,021.02
2025-12-22900$102.77$92,493
2025-12-16280$102.87$28,803.6
2025-12-15160$104.37$16,699.2
2025-11-121,448$105.04$152,097.92
2025-10-14950$106.12$100,814

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 NRP 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.