POR (POR)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 5/9, Altman Z 1.0.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency of this entity presents a notable constraint, as the 3.8% ROIC falls well below typical cost-of-capital thresholds required to generate value creation for shareholders. While the DuPont decomposition reveals that earnings power is driven by an 8.6% net margin and moderate leverage at a 3.20x equity multiplier rather than high asset turnover of only 0.27x, the underlying business quality signals mixed durability. The Piotroski F-Score of 5/9 suggests average financial strength with potential weaknesses in profitability or liquidity trends over time, whereas the negative Beneish M-Score of -2.80 indicates a low probability of earnings manipulation and supports the credibility of the reported margins. However, revenue growth remains subdued at just 4% year-over-yo, limiting the scalability of current operational models despite healthy gross margin expansion to 48%.
Valuation metrics currently sit at an 18.9x P/E multiple, which requires contextualization against historical averages and sector peers to determine if the market is pricing in excessive optimism or reasonable growth expectations. Given the modest revenue trajectory and lack of explicit fair value data from a DCF model, the current price implies that investors are betting on margin expansion or an eventual acceleration in asset turnover rather than immediate top-line scaling. The disconnect between the low ROIC and the multiple suggests that future returns will depend heavily on improving capital efficiency; without significant leverage increases or margin widening beyond historical norms, sustaining this valuation level may be challenging given the limited organic growth runway visible in recent filings.
Recent insider activity over the last 90 days shows net selling of $266,140, a signal that management or affiliated parties are reducing their exposure while valuations remain elevated relative to fundamental cash generation capabilities. This divergence between insider disposition and public ownership often warrants heightened scrutiny regarding future capital allocation priorities or confidence in near-term earnings visibility. While the low Beneish score offers some assurance of reporting integrity, the combination of subpar ROIC, sluggish growth, and active insider selling creates a risk profile where downside protection relies on mean reversion rather than fundamental acceleration.
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 VPU or MDYV, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell POR shares regardless of POR's individual fundamentals. We estimate $455M of passive capital is structurally linked to POR through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on POR'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 POR to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If POR (POR) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies NextEra Energy Inc. (NEE) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with POR. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 11 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
POR Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest POR Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 11 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
POR Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does POR convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
POR converts -6% 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 106% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-2.9%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-06 | 5,810 | $49.12 | $285,387.2 |
| 2026-05-04 | 15 | $49.73 | $745.95 |
| 2026-04-01 | 4 | $52.77 | $211.08 |
| 2026-03-20 | 4,624 | $52.26 | $241,650.24 |
| 2026-02-26 | 62 | $53.48 | $3,315.76 |
| 2026-02-20 | 1,686 | $52.09 | $87,823.74 |
| 2026-02-19 | 7,496 | $50.98 | $382,146.08 |
| 2026-02-05 | 30 | $50.69 | $1,520.7 |
| 2026-01-23 | 58 | $49.94 | $2,896.52 |
| 2025-12-31 | 114 | $48.09 | $5,482.26 |
| 2025-12-11 | 1,359 | $47.83 | $65,000.97 |
| 2025-12-08 | 1,745 | $48.57 | $84,754.65 |
| 2025-12-04 | 3,666 | $49.33 | $180,843.78 |
| 2025-12-03 | 30 | $49.50 | $1,485 |
| 2025-11-24 | 3 | $49.57 | $148.71 |
| 2025-11-13 | 1 | $50.52 | $50.52 |
| 2025-10-31 | 13,248 | $45.80 | $606,758.4 |
| 2025-10-16 | 308 | $43.81 | $13,493.48 |
| 2025-10-14 | 514 | $43.22 | $22,215.08 |
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 POR 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.