TYL (TYL)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 5.7 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold).
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics display a robust balance sheet and operational integrity, evidenced by a high Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 and a negative Beneish M-Score of -2.71 that strongly suggests earnings quality is not being manipulated. Return on Equity decomposes into three distinct drivers: healthy gross margins at 46.5% supported by net margins near 13.5%, moderate asset turnover of 0.41x, and conservative leverage with an equity multiplier of only 1.52x, indicating the firm relies more on operational efficiency than financial engineering to generate returns. While the ROIC stands at a modest 8.0% relative to typical high-growth peers, the combination of strong profitability metrics and low debt suggests stable capital generation rather than aggressive expansion risk.
Valuation metrics present a significant divergence between historical norms and intrinsic value models. The current price-to-earnings ratio of 46.8x implies that the market is pricing in substantial future growth acceleration far beyond the reported year-over-year revenue increase of 9.1%. This premium valuation contrasts sharply with a Discounted Cash Flow analysis yielding a fair value estimate of $438, suggesting the current market price may be detached from cash flow fundamentals unless implied growth rates exceed conservative assumptions. The wide gap between the multiple and the DCF-derived floor indicates that any shortfall in future execution would likely result in immediate re-rating pressure on the stock price.
Risk assessment is complicated by conflicting signals regarding insider sentiment versus fundamental strength. Despite the high quality scores indicating sound financial management, there has been $1,964,566 of net insider selling over the last 90 days, which often precedes downside volatility or suggests insiders are taking profits at elevated levels. This divergence between strong operational metrics and active insider distribution warrants caution; while the balance sheet remains solid with low leverage, the combination of expensive valuation and negative insider flow creates a scenario where downside protection is thin if growth expectations fail to materialize as priced in by the market.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $578 | $429 | $340 |
| 3% | $675 | $477 | $367 |
| 4% | $819 | $541 | $402 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $477 (+0.0%). 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 MOAT or XSW, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell TYL shares regardless of TYL's individual fundamentals. We estimate $2.0B of passive capital is structurally linked to TYL 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 TYL to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If TYL (TYL) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Seagate Technology Holdings plc (STX) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with TYL. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 29 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
TYL Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest TYL Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 32 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
TYL Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does TYL convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
TYL converts 114% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 56,422 | $298.59 | $16.8M |
| 2026-05-13 | 56,431 | $309.65 | $17.5M |
| 2026-05-05 | 2 | $327.25 | $654.5 |
| 2026-05-01 | 4 | $341.14 | $1,364.56 |
| 2026-04-22 | 1 | $341.46 | $341.46 |
| 2026-04-21 | 1 | $345.93 | $345.93 |
| 2026-04-20 | 146 | $342.61 | $50,021.06 |
| 2026-04-16 | 974 | $337.61 | $328,832.14 |
| 2026-04-07 | 25 | $337.20 | $8,430 |
| 2026-04-06 | 971 | $338.03 | $328,227.13 |
| 2026-03-25 | 4 | $338.27 | $1,353.08 |
| 2026-03-23 | 7 | $350.20 | $2,451.4 |
| 2026-03-04 | 23,044 | $367.22 | $8.5M |
| 2026-03-02 | 10 | $354.69 | $3,546.9 |
| 2026-02-27 | 49,965 | $353.11 | $17.6M |
| 2026-02-03 | 3 | $362.88 | $1,088.64 |
| 2026-02-02 | 1,923 | $369.40 | $710,356.2 |
| 2026-01-13 | 25 | $446.46 | $11,161.5 |
| 2026-01-09 | 298 | $453.40 | $135,113.2 |
| 2025-12-29 | 439 | $461.06 | $202,405.34 |
| 2025-12-23 | 809 | $464.97 | $376,160.73 |
| 2025-12-22 | 10,934 | $457.90 | $5.0M |
| 2025-12-16 | 671 | $447.00 | $299,937 |
| 2025-12-08 | 25 | $469.33 | $11,733.25 |
| 2025-12-04 | 4,839 | $461.84 | $2.2M |
| 2025-12-01 | 355 | $469.62 | $166,715.1 |
| 2025-11-28 | 43 | $465.96 | $20,036.28 |
| 2025-11-07 | 1,098 | $465.01 | $510,580.98 |
| 2025-11-03 | 32 | $476.26 | $15,240.32 |
| 2025-10-30 | 106 | $478.00 | $50,668 |
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 TYL 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.