PBF (PBF)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicBelow-average fundamentals indicated by Piotroski score of 2/9.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of PBF reveal a distressed operational profile characterized by negative capital efficiency and profitability. An ROIC-WACC spread of -0.2% indicates the company is currently destroying value rather than generating returns above its cost of capital, while a DuPont-decomposed ROE of -2.9% underscores this deterioration through a confluence of a -0.5% net margin, elevated asset turnover at 2.25x, and significant leverage with an equity multiplier of 2.39x. This financial weakness is corroborated by the Piotroski F-Score of 2/9, signaling severe fundamental degradation across multiple dimensions, including negative gross margins of -1.9% and revenue contraction of 11.4% year-over-year. Although the Beneish M-Score of -2.58 suggests low earnings manipulation risk, it does not mitigate the reality that the business is operating in a loss-making regime with shrinking top-line activity.
Valuation metrics for PBF are currently decoupled from traditional growth narratives due to its negative earnings base and declining revenue trajectory. With net margins compressed into the red and sales falling sharply, standard multiple comparisons become less meaningful as the denominator erodes; however, the market appears to be pricing in continued operational headwinds rather than a turnaround catalyst given the lack of positive momentum indicators. The absence of implied growth support is evident when viewed against the backdrop of an F-Score that flags deteriorating financial health, suggesting current valuations may reflect a "value trap" scenario where low multiples fail to account for the structural challenges inherent in negative ROIC and shrinking cash flows.
Insider activity presents a stark divergence from any potential recovery thesis, with $414 million in net insider selling over the past 90 days serving as a potent risk signal. This substantial outflow by management aligns with the deteriorating Piotroski metrics and reinforces concerns regarding capital preservation amidst negative operating leverage. While the low Beneish score implies transparency in reporting, the combination of aggressive insider disposition, revenue contraction, and value-destroying ROIC creates an asymmetric risk profile where downside potential outweighs any speculative upside from mean reversion.
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
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 PBF shares regardless of PBF's individual fundamentals. We estimate $234M of passive capital is structurally linked to PBF through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on PBF'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 PBF to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If PBF (PBF) 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 PBF. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 10 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
PBF Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest PBF Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 10 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
PBF Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does PBF convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
PBF converts -124% 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 224% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-08 | 7,510 | $40.59 | $304,830.9 |
| 2026-05-07 | 20 | $41.59 | $831.8 |
| 2026-05-06 | 811 | $46.19 | $37,460.09 |
| 2026-05-01 | 448 | $43.36 | $19,425.28 |
| 2026-04-24 | 248 | $40.97 | $10,160.56 |
| 2026-04-22 | 2,648 | $40.69 | $107,747.12 |
| 2026-04-07 | 17 | $46.37 | $788.29 |
| 2026-04-06 | 6,878 | $45.39 | $312,192.42 |
| 2026-03-26 | 1,426 | $49.35 | $70,373.1 |
| 2026-03-24 | 15,579 | $46.59 | $725,825.61 |
| 2026-03-23 | 16,069 | $49.32 | $792,523.08 |
| 2026-03-20 | 3,184 | $46.83 | $149,106.72 |
| 2026-03-17 | 86 | $43.57 | $3,747.02 |
| 2026-03-13 | 294 | $42.92 | $12,618.48 |
| 2026-03-12 | 189 | $41.99 | $7,936.11 |
| 2026-03-09 | 9 | $43.25 | $389.25 |
| 2026-03-04 | 8 | $39.76 | $318.08 |
| 2026-02-05 | 25,560 | $35.29 | $902,012.4 |
| 2026-02-04 | 6,518 | $34.46 | $224,610.28 |
| 2026-01-29 | 3,399 | $32.90 | $111,827.1 |
| 2026-01-22 | 58 | $32.82 | $1,903.56 |
| 2026-01-21 | 4,277 | $30.79 | $131,688.83 |
| 2026-01-02 | 23,906 | $27.12 | $648,330.72 |
| 2025-12-29 | 808 | $26.15 | $21,129.2 |
| 2025-12-22 | 2,809 | $26.35 | $74,017.15 |
| 2025-12-11 | 29,858 | $31.75 | $947,991.5 |
| 2025-12-05 | 22,559 | $33.38 | $753,019.42 |
| 2025-12-04 | 16,050 | $33.79 | $542,329.5 |
| 2025-11-21 | 1,656 | $34.75 | $57,546 |
| 2025-11-20 | 15 | $37.46 | $561.9 |
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 PBF 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.