TPH (TPH)

$4.0B
Market Cap
17.2
P/E Ratio
1.33
Beta
Dividend Yield
Piotroski 4/9Altman Z 4.3 SafeBeneish M -1.87 Flag (> −2.22)ROIC−WACC -6.0%

Quantitative Summary

Deterministic

Financial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 4.3. Beneish M-Score of -1.87 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-Generated

The fundamental economics of TPH reveal a significant divergence between capital efficiency and profitability metrics, characterized by an ROIC-WACC spread of -6.0%, which indicates the company is currently destroying value relative to its cost of equity. This negative spread contrasts with a Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 and a Beneish M-Score of -1.87, suggesting moderate financial strength but no clear evidence of earnings manipulation despite recent revenue contraction. The DuPont decomposition highlights that while the net margin remains robust at 7.0% against a gross margin of 21.0%, this profitability is not supported by operational leverage or growth; instead, revenue has declined sharply by 22.8% year-over-year, pointing to deteriorating demand dynamics rather than pricing power or asset turnover issues as the primary drivers of performance.

Valuation analysis presents a complex picture where the current P/E ratio of 17.2x appears compressed relative to historical norms and sector peers given the negative growth trajectory, yet it does not fully reflect the underlying capital destruction implied by the -6.0% ROIC-WACC spread. A DCF model suggests a fair value of $45, which implies that current market pricing may be discounting future cash flows more aggressively than fundamental profitability alone would justify if margins were to stabilize without further revenue erosion. The market appears to be pricing in continued headwinds or potential restructuring costs rather than immediate recovery, creating a scenario where the multiple does not necessarily represent a bargain absent a credible turnaround catalyst that addresses the core capital efficiency deficit.

Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.

DCF Sandbox

Interactive

Sensitivity Matrix

TG ↓ / WACC →8.9%10.9%12.9%
2%$54$40$32
3%$62$45$34
4%$73$50$37

Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs .

Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.9%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $45 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.

Price Chart with Moving Averages

Loading chart...
SMA 50 SMA 200

Quant Health Deep Dive

4/9
Piotroski F-Score
Average — mixed operational signals
4.3
Altman Z-Score
Safe Zone — above 3.0 threshold per academic model. Thresholds: >3 safe, 1.8–3 grey, <1.8 distress.
-1.87
Beneish M-Score
Above threshold — earnings quality may warrant further review per Beneish model. Threshold: <-2.22 = below threshold.

Profitability & Value Creation

21.0%
Gross Margin
7.0%
Net Margin
4.9%
ROIC
10.9%
WACC
ROIC − WACC Spread: -6.0%— Negative spread.
-22.8%
Revenue Growth (YoY)
-47.4%
Earnings Growth (YoY)
128.5M
Free Cash Flow

Balance Sheet Health

0.50x
Debt / Equity
33.86x
Current Ratio
0.6x
Net Debt / EBITDA
3.07%
FCF Yield
332.1M
EBITDA

Earnings Surprise History

Q4
✓ Beat
Est: $0.49
Act: $0.70
+42.9%
Q3
✓ Beat
Est: $0.68
Act: $0.77
+13.5%
Q2
✓ Beat
Est: $0.52
Act: $0.64
+23.1%
Q1
✓ Beat
Est: $0.78
Act: $0.80
+2.3%

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.

Loading drawdown chart...

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.

Loading beta chart...
Rolling Beta Market (β = 1.0)

Fundamentals

18.0
Forward P/E
PEG Ratio
1.19
Price/Book
2M
Avg Volume
$46.76
52W High
$27.90
52W Low
52W Range Position

Passive Flow Attribution

ETF Draft Effect
$80M
Tracked Passive Exposure
3
ETFs Holding TPH
0.10%
Avg Weight in ETFs
$83B
Total ETF AUM

When investors buy or sell ETFs like VTWO or VCR, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell TPH shares regardless of TPH's individual fundamentals. We estimate $80M of passive capital is structurally linked to TPH through 3 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on TPH's daily trading dynamics.

Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 3 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.

ETF Contagion Visualizer

Simulate a price drop in TPH to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.

TPH Shock
-0%
Est. Passive Redemption
$0
Systemic Risk
STABLE
TPHEpicenterVBRETFVTWOETFVCRETFAMZNLow RiskTSLALow RiskHDLow RiskMCDLow RiskTJXLow Risk
TPH Price Drop (%)0

If TPH (TPH) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with TPH. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.

Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 3 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.

TPH Ownership Dynamics

Ticker
TPH

ETFs with Highest TPH Exposure

Float lock-up computed from 8 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).

TPH Capital Efficiency

How efficiently does TPH convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.

Free Cash Flow
$129M
EBITDA
$332M
FCF Conversion
39%
Reinvestment Rate
61%
39% of EBITDA → Free Cash
0% (cash burn)25% (low)50% (efficient)100% (pure cash)
ROIC
4.9%
ROIC − WACC Spread
-6.0%

TPH converts 39% 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 61% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-6.0%), 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.

DateFailed SharesClose PriceNotional Value
2026-05-13141,432$46.97$6.6M
2026-05-061$46.83$46.83
2026-04-281$46.88$46.88
2026-03-2761$46.67$2,846.87
2026-03-254$46.70$186.8
2026-03-238$46.62$372.96
2026-03-04332$46.36$15,391.52
2026-02-27273,488$46.30$12.7M
2026-02-26204,938$46.38$9.5M
2026-02-25199,218$46.37$9.2M
2026-02-24212,009$46.33$9.8M
2026-02-23159,578$46.31$7.4M
2026-02-2016,473$46.31$762,864.63
2026-02-17258$46.37$11,963.46
2026-02-0569$35.35$2,439.15
2025-12-31159$31.77$5,051.43
2025-12-2698$32.01$3,136.98
2025-12-1034$32.70$1,111.8
2025-12-0171$34.12$2,422.52
2025-11-2697$33.84$3,282.48
2025-11-1449$31.80$1,558.2
2025-11-036,233$31.85$198,521.05

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 TPH 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.