PBH (PBH)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of PBH present a dichotomy between robust profitability and stagnant top-line expansion. While the company demonstrates high-margin operations with a gross margin of 55.8% and an impressive net margin of 18.9%, revenue growth has decelerated to merely 1.1% year-over-year, suggesting limited organic scalability in the current cycle. Quality metrics reinforce this mixed picture: an ROIC of 8.0% indicates capital efficiency that is positive but not exceptional relative to high-growth peers, while a Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 signals moderate financial strength without recent deterioration or significant distress. The Beneish M-Score of -2.39 further supports the integrity of these earnings figures by indicating low probability of manipulation, though it does not inherently validate future growth trajectories given the flat revenue profile.
Valuation metrics suggest the market is pricing in a specific set of expectations that may diverge from intrinsic value models. Trading at 14.4x forward earnings, PBH commands a premium multiple despite its sluggish sales velocity, implying investors are anticipating margin expansion or strategic shifts rather than volume growth. However, this valuation stance contrasts sharply with DCF-derived fair value estimates of $39 per share; if the current market price exceeds this threshold, the stock appears to be priced for perfection in an environment where revenue generation remains static. The disconnect between the high multiple and the 1.1% revenue growth rate highlights a potential risk premium that assumes future acceleration not currently reflected in financial statements.
The synthesis of these factors reveals a company with solid earnings quality but constrained operational momentum, creating a scenario where valuation relies heavily on forward-looking assumptions rather than historical performance trends. The combination of moderate capital efficiency and flat sales suggests the business is likely in a mature or transitional phase, requiring careful scrutiny of any catalysts that could justify the current premium over intrinsic valuations derived from discounted cash flow models.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $50 | $34 | $24 |
| 3% | $60 | $39 | $27 |
| 4% | $76 | $46 | $31 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $39 (+0.0%). 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 XPH or SLYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell PBH shares regardless of PBH's individual fundamentals. We estimate $65M of passive capital is structurally linked to PBH through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on PBH'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 PBH to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If PBH (PBH) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies ORGANON + CO (OGN) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 3 ETFs with PBH. 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.
PBH Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest PBH Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 11 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
PBH Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does PBH convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
PBH converts 67% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag.
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 | 25 | $54.31 | $1,357.75 |
| 2026-05-06 | 35 | $55.75 | $1,951.25 |
| 2026-05-05 | 276 | $55.31 | $15,265.56 |
| 2026-05-04 | 3,973 | $55.09 | $218,872.57 |
| 2026-04-29 | 27,767 | $58.75 | $1.6M |
| 2026-04-21 | 87 | $58.68 | $5,105.16 |
| 2026-04-15 | 297 | $56.66 | $16,828.02 |
| 2026-04-13 | 7 | $56.55 | $395.85 |
| 2026-04-10 | 17 | $56.76 | $964.92 |
| 2026-03-30 | 94 | $59.22 | $5,566.68 |
| 2026-03-20 | 16 | $60.06 | $960.96 |
| 2026-03-18 | 1,037 | $62.30 | $64,605.1 |
| 2026-03-17 | 448 | $60.91 | $27,287.68 |
| 2026-03-13 | 32 | $61.90 | $1,980.8 |
| 2026-03-09 | 1 | $67.19 | $67.19 |
| 2026-03-05 | 1,926 | $69.07 | $133,028.82 |
| 2026-02-27 | 3,273 | $70.21 | $229,797.33 |
| 2026-02-24 | 29 | $69.67 | $2,020.43 |
| 2026-02-23 | 537 | $69.58 | $37,364.46 |
| 2026-02-20 | 111 | $69.01 | $7,660.11 |
| 2026-02-19 | 65 | $66.52 | $4,323.8 |
| 2026-02-13 | 907 | $66.96 | $60,732.72 |
| 2026-02-05 | 1 | $67.03 | $67.03 |
| 2026-02-04 | 4,850 | $64.43 | $312,485.5 |
| 2026-01-27 | 104 | $65.66 | $6,828.64 |
| 2026-01-20 | 553 | $65.12 | $36,011.36 |
| 2026-01-16 | 1,286 | $65.61 | $84,374.46 |
| 2026-01-15 | 8 | $64.79 | $518.32 |
| 2026-01-05 | 648 | $61.22 | $39,670.56 |
| 2026-01-02 | 526 | $61.69 | $32,448.94 |
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 PBH 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.