PD (PD)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicStrong operational fundamentals (Piotroski 7/9) with Altman Z of 0.9. Beneish M-Score of -1.78 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 capital allocation efficiency presents a stark contradiction to the company's exceptional profitability metrics. Despite generating an impressive net margin of 35.2% and gross margins at 85.0%, the firm is destroying value relative to its cost of capital, evidenced by a negative ROIC-WACC spread of -4.2%. This divergence suggests that while operational leverage drives high returns on individual sales dollars, the scale or duration of invested assets fails to compound equity effectively. The Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 indicates strong fundamental stability and value creation potential in recent periods, yet this is counterbalanced by a precarious Altman Z-Score of 0.9, signaling elevated bankruptcy risk that outweighs the positive earnings quality signals from the Beneish M-Score of -1.78.
Valuation appears deeply depressed relative to historical norms and sector peers given the current P/E compression at 3.4x, which starkly contrasts with a DCF-derived fair value estimate of $70. This wide discrepancy implies that market pricing is heavily penalizing the balance sheet fragility indicated by the low Altman score rather than focusing on the high-margin business model or the robust Piotroski fundamentals. The market seems to be discounting future cash flows aggressively, potentially assuming a higher risk premium due to solvency concerns despite the company's apparent ability to maintain superior margins and avoid earnings manipulation as suggested by the negative M-Score.
The investment thesis hinges on resolving this fundamental disconnect between operational excellence and capital efficiency while navigating significant downside protection risks. The data suggests a scenario where high profitability is not translating into sustainable shareholder value growth, creating an asymmetric risk profile where bankruptcy concerns may persist even if margins remain robust. Investors must weigh whether the current valuation adequately compensates for the solvency distress or if there exists a catalyst to improve capital turnover and narrow the negative spread between returns on invested capital and the weighted average cost of capital.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6% | 7.3% | 9.3% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $79 | $58 | $41 |
| 3% | $103 | $70 | $46 |
| 4% | $152 | $90 | $54 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=7.3%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $70 (+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 XSW or VFVA, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell PD shares regardless of PD's individual fundamentals. We estimate $21M of passive capital is structurally linked to PD through 5 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on PD'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 PD to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If PD (PD) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies NVIDIA Corp. (NVDA) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with PD. 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.
PD Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest PD Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 8 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
PD Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does PD convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
PD converts 259% 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 (-4.2%), 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.
| Date | Failed Shares | Close Price | Notional Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-08 | 1,030 | $7.41 | $7,632.3 |
| 2026-05-06 | 1,499 | $7.21 | $10,807.79 |
| 2026-05-04 | 66 | $7.35 | $485.1 |
| 2026-04-16 | 28 | $6.32 | $176.96 |
| 2026-04-06 | 235 | $6.40 | $1,504 |
| 2026-03-20 | 132,848 | $6.90 | $916,651.2 |
| 2026-03-10 | 96 | $7.88 | $756.48 |
| 2026-02-20 | 33,249 | $6.69 | $222,435.81 |
| 2026-02-10 | 119 | $7.82 | $930.58 |
| 2026-02-05 | 25 | $8.69 | $217.25 |
| 2026-01-22 | 107,538 | $10.77 | $1.2M |
| 2025-12-26 | 51 | $13.04 | $665.04 |
| 2025-12-17 | 485 | $12.88 | $6,246.8 |
| 2025-12-16 | 10,784 | $12.69 | $136,848.96 |
| 2025-12-10 | 3,967 | $13.14 | $52,126.38 |
| 2025-12-04 | 64,388 | $12.07 | $777,163.16 |
| 2025-11-05 | 41 | $15.22 | $624.02 |
| 2025-10-30 | 201 | $15.76 | $3,167.76 |
| 2025-10-21 | 145 | $15.83 | $2,295.35 |
| 2025-10-14 | 20,096 | $16.11 | $323,746.56 |
| 2025-10-07 | 838 | $15.98 | $13,391.24 |
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 PD 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.