RBC (RBC)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 7.3 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe company exhibits a robust fundamental profile characterized by strong profitability drivers and high-quality earnings, evidenced by a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 and a negative Beneish M-Score of -2.33 that suggests minimal manipulation risk. The return on equity decomposition reveals an engine driven primarily by operational efficiency rather than leverage; specifically, the 8.1% ROE is fueled by healthy net margins of 15.0% and solid asset turnover of 0.35x, supported only modestly by a 1.55x equity multiplier. While the gross margin stands at 44.4%, revenue growth remains moderate at 4.9% year-over-year, indicating that current earnings power is more a function of pricing or cost control than top-line expansion.
Valuation metrics present a significant divergence from historical norms and sector peers, with the current price-to-earnings ratio of 62.0x implying substantial premium expectations for future performance not yet reflected in recent growth rates. This multiple appears disconnected from the underlying fundamentals, as the discounted cash flow model calculates a fair value of $106, suggesting the market is pricing in aggressive implied growth that exceeds the observed 4.9% revenue trajectory. The disparity between the high valuation multiple and moderate fundamental expansion indicates that current share prices may be detached from intrinsic value based on present earnings power.
Risk assessment highlights concerning insider activity, with net selling of $2,270,519 over the past ninety days potentially signaling management's caution regarding near-term prospects despite the strong balance sheet quality indicators. While the low debt and high F-Score suggest structural resilience, the combination of elevated valuation levels and active insider distribution creates a scenario where downside volatility could be amplified if earnings fail to accelerate meaningfully beyond current modest growth rates.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 11.5% | 13.5% | 15.5% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $127 | $98 | $77 |
| 3% | $141 | $106 | $83 |
| 4% | $158 | $117 | $90 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=13.5%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $106 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
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 MDYG or VBK, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell RBC shares regardless of RBC's individual fundamentals. We estimate $1.7B of passive capital is structurally linked to RBC through 8 tracked ETFs. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption cycles can create noticeable volume spikes unrelated to company news.
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 RBC to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If RBC (RBC) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Caterpillar Inc. (CAT) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with RBC. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 14 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
RBC Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest RBC Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 14 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
RBC Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does RBC convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
RBC converts 50% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The 50% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-6.7%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-15 | 1 | $598.23 | $598.23 |
| 2026-04-10 | 46 | $595.11 | $27,375.06 |
| 2026-03-31 | 60 | $524.38 | $31,462.8 |
| 2026-03-02 | 16 | $575.92 | $9,214.72 |
| 2026-02-04 | 201 | $516.10 | $103,736.1 |
| 2026-02-03 | 25 | $507.13 | $12,678.25 |
| 2026-01-29 | 1 | $508.95 | $508.95 |
| 2026-01-23 | 60 | $504.99 | $30,299.4 |
| 2026-01-22 | 32 | $504.71 | $16,150.72 |
| 2025-12-08 | 1 | $443.44 | $443.44 |
| 2025-11-28 | 32 | $443.29 | $14,185.28 |
| 2025-11-24 | 100 | $426.16 | $42,616 |
| 2025-11-17 | 4 | $432.04 | $1,728.16 |
| 2025-11-04 | 5 | $428.40 | $2,142 |
| 2025-11-03 | 21 | $428.53 | $8,999.13 |
| 2025-10-31 | 168 | $406.45 | $68,283.6 |
| 2025-10-14 | 577 | $380.76 | $219,698.52 |
| 2025-10-10 | 8 | $384.43 | $3,075.44 |
| 2025-10-09 | 8 | $382.19 | $3,057.52 |
| 2025-10-08 | 8 | $373.47 | $2,987.76 |
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 RBC 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.