NVST (NVST)

$4.0B
Market Cap
87.7
P/E Ratio
0.95
Beta
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 6/9Altman Z 1.7 DistressBeneish M -2.51 CleanROIC−WACC -5.4%

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

Financial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 1.7.

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

Algorithmic Teardown

AI-Generated

The capital allocation efficiency for NVST presents a significant concern, characterized by an ROIC of 3.5% that falls substantially below the estimated WACC of 8.9%, resulting in a negative spread of -5.4%. This indicates the firm is currently destroying shareholder value through its core operations rather than generating excess returns. Despite this fundamental weakness, the DuPont components reveal a nuanced picture where robust gross margins at 54.7% and moderate revenue growth of 8.3% are offset by critically thin net margins of just 1.7%. While the Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 suggests reasonable financial strength relative to peers, an Altman Z-Score of 1.7 places the company in a zone indicating potential distress or high bankruptcy risk, creating a stark contrast with its relatively clean Beneish M-Score of -2.51 which typically signals low earnings manipulation probability.

Valuation metrics reflect extreme market optimism that appears entirely disconnected from the underlying capital efficiency dynamics. The current P/E ratio of 87.7x sits at a premium multiple, suggesting investors are pricing in aggressive future growth and margin expansion that has not yet materialized in the bottom line. This disparity is highlighted by the DCF fair value estimate of $54, which implies a necessary re-rating to justify the existing share price given the current return profile. Essentially, the market valuation assumes a fundamental transformation in operating leverage or cost structure that contradicts the current reality where returns on invested capital remain negative relative to the cost of equity.

The risk-reward landscape is skewed heavily toward downside volatility due to the combination of value-destructive operations and elevated distress indicators. The proximity of the Altman Z-Score to bankruptcy territory introduces significant tail risks, while the massive gap between the current P/E and implied fair value suggests a high probability of multiple compression if growth expectations are not met immediately. Although the low Beneish score offers some comfort regarding earnings integrity, it does not mitigate the operational inefficiencies evident in the negative ROIC spread or the precarious solvency metrics inherent to an Altman Z-Score below 2.0.

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

DCF Sandbox

Interactive

Sensitivity Matrix

TG ↓ / WACC →6.9%8.9%10.9%
2%$69$47$36
3%$85$54$39
4%$112$64$44

Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs .

Pre-computed DCF: WACC=8.9%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $54 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

6/9
Piotroski F-Score
Average — mixed operational signals
1.7
Altman Z-Score
Distress Zone — below 1.8 threshold per academic model. Thresholds: >3 safe, 1.8–3 grey, <1.8 distress.
-2.51
Beneish M-Score
Below threshold — no statistical earnings quality concern per Beneish model. Threshold: <-2.22 = below threshold.

Profitability & Value Creation

54.7%
Gross Margin
1.7%
Net Margin
3.5%
ROIC
8.9%
WACC
ROIC − WACC Spread: -5.4%— Negative spread.
+8.3%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
+104.2%
Earnings Growth (YoY)
230.4M
Free Cash Flow

Balance Sheet Health

0.83x
Debt / Equity
2.38x
Current Ratio
5.8x
Interest Coverage
0.6x
Net Debt / EBITDA
5.39%
FCF Yield
364.5M
EBITDA

Earnings Surprise History

Q4
✓ Beat
Est: $0.20
Act: $0.24
+17.1%
Q3
✓ Beat
Est: $0.23
Act: $0.26
+13.5%
Q2
✓ Beat
Est: $0.28
Act: $0.32
+16.0%
Q1
✓ Beat
Est: $0.32
Act: $0.38
+17.7%

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

15.7
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
1.30
Price/Book
3M
Avg Volume
$30.42
52W High
$14.22
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$130M
Tracked Passive Exposure
8
ETFs Holding NVST
0.10%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$136B
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like XHE or MDYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell NVST shares regardless of NVST's individual fundamentals. We estimate $130M of passive capital is structurally linked to NVST through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on NVST'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 NVST to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

NVST Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
NVSTEpicenterVBRETFMDYETFVHTETFSTAAUnknownNVCRUnknownGKOSUnknownLNTHLow RiskMASILow Risk
NVST Price Drop (%)0

If NVST (NVST) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies STAAR SURGICAL CO (STAA) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with NVST. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.

Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 9 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.

NVST Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
NVST

Float lock-up computed from 10 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

NVST Capital Efficiency

How efficiently does NVST convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.

Free Cash Flow
$230M
EBITDA
$365M
FCF Conversion
63%
Reinvestment Rate
37%
63% of EBITDA → Free Cash
0% (cash burn)25% (low)50% (efficient)100% (pure cash)
ROIC
3.5%
ROIC − WACC Spread
-5.4%

NVST converts 63% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-5.4%), 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.

DateFailed SharesClose PriceNotional Value
2026-05-05262$25.81$6,762.22
2026-04-105,816$26.67$155,112.72
2026-03-0320,966$29.44$617,239.04
2026-02-11597$30.17$18,011.49
2026-01-29449$24.08$10,811.92
2026-01-161,177$24.69$29,060.13
2026-01-0810$22.93$229.3
2026-01-0720,943$23.21$486,087.03
2025-12-29988$21.99$21,726.12
2025-12-227,481$22.28$166,676.68
2025-12-165$22.06$110.3
2025-12-02108$20.77$2,243.16
2025-11-12347,000$20.21$7.0M

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 NVST 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.