RHP (RHP)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 1.2.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency of RHP reveals a distinct divergence between return on invested capital and shareholder returns, driven primarily by financial leverage rather than operational superiority. While the ROIC-WACC spread sits at 7.0%, indicating modest value creation relative to cost of capital, the DuPont decomposition shows that an equity multiplier of 5.10x is the primary engine behind a 20.1% ROE; this high leverage magnifies returns but simultaneously amplifies downside risk if asset utilization falters. The Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 suggests moderate financial strength with potential weaknesses in profitability or liquidity trends, yet the negative Beneish M-Score of -2.54 provides a counterweight by signaling low probability of earnings manipulation and reinforcing the credibility of the reported net margin of 9.4%.
Valuation metrics position RHP at a premium relative to its growth trajectory, with a current P/E of 24.1x implying that the market prices in significant future expansion beyond the recent 10.2% revenue growth rate. Although no explicit DCF fair value or historical percentile data is provided for direct comparison, the multiple suggests investors are anticipating acceleration in asset turnover or margin expansion to justify the current pricing. The gap between the modest ROIC and the elevated valuation multiple indicates that market expectations rely heavily on the sustainability of the 31.5% gross margin and the ability to maintain high equity leverage without triggering solvency concerns, rather than immediate fundamental improvements in operational efficiency.
Insider activity over the last ninety days shows $785,226 net buying, which aligns with a management perspective that may view current levels as attractive despite the elevated multiple. However, this insider flow must be weighed against the structural risks inherent in the 5.10x equity multiplier and the middling Piotroski score; while insiders are accumulating shares, the company's fundamental quality does not yet reflect high-grade investment characteristics typically associated with strong F-scores or robust ROIC spreads. The risk/reward profile appears balanced between insider confidence in near-term prospects and the mathematical vulnerabilities introduced by aggressive leverage and moderate operational scores.
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
⚠️ Dividend consumes >80% of FCF — sustainability risk.
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 SLYG or SPSM, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell RHP shares regardless of RHP's individual fundamentals. We estimate $621M of passive capital is structurally linked to RHP through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on RHP'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 RHP to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If RHP (RHP) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Vanguard Real Estate II Index Fund Institutional Plus Shares (VRTPX) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with RHP. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 8 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
RHP Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest RHP Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 8 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
RHP Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does RHP convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
RHP converts 30% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a moderate conversion rate — significant EBITDA is consumed by capital expenditures, working capital changes, or interest payments. The 70% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-1.8%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-14 | 2,186 | $101.70 | $222,316.2 |
| 2026-03-31 | 11,133 | $91.17 | $1.0M |
| 2026-03-17 | 4,793 | $91.47 | $438,415.71 |
| 2026-03-09 | 16 | $95.81 | $1,532.96 |
| 2026-02-23 | 47 | $104.85 | $4,927.95 |
| 2026-02-19 | 70 | $102.13 | $7,149.1 |
| 2026-02-13 | 13,279 | $100.20 | $1.3M |
| 2026-02-10 | 591 | $97.94 | $57,882.54 |
| 2026-02-09 | 453 | $97.96 | $44,375.88 |
| 2026-02-02 | 839 | $94.70 | $79,453.3 |
| 2026-01-27 | 788 | $95.66 | $75,380.08 |
| 2026-01-12 | 4 | $95.00 | $380 |
| 2026-01-08 | 81 | $91.93 | $7,446.33 |
| 2025-12-31 | 600 | $96.87 | $58,122 |
| 2025-12-26 | 80 | $97.69 | $7,815.2 |
| 2025-12-12 | 39 | $96.76 | $3,773.64 |
| 2025-12-10 | 3 | $91.77 | $275.31 |
| 2025-12-08 | 31 | $91.74 | $2,843.94 |
| 2025-11-26 | 383 | $96.12 | $36,813.96 |
| 2025-11-13 | 7,180 | $94.41 | $677,863.8 |
| 2025-11-06 | 82 | $92.27 | $7,566.14 |
| 2025-10-30 | 98 | $86.65 | $8,491.7 |
| 2025-10-28 | 1,359 | $87.50 | $118,912.5 |
| 2025-10-14 | 2,242 | $88.89 | $199,291.38 |
| 2025-10-10 | 43 | $88.86 | $3,820.98 |
| 2025-10-02 | 73 | $89.38 | $6,524.74 |
| 2025-10-01 | 15,530 | $89.59 | $1.4M |
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 RHP 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.