WCC (WCC)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicBelow-average fundamentals indicated by Piotroski score of 3/9. Beneish M-Score of -2.20 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-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of the company reveal a capital allocation challenge, evidenced by an ROIC-WACC spread of -2.6%, indicating that current returns on invested capital fail to cover the cost of financing. A DuPont-style analysis highlights this inefficiency: while gross margins sit at 21.1% and revenue grows at 7.8%, the net margin compresses significantly to just 2.7%, suggesting high operating leverage or expense drag is eroding profitability despite top-line expansion. Credit quality metrics present a mixed picture; an Altman Z-Score of 3.2 places the firm in the "gray zone" between safety and distress, whereas the low Piotroski F-Score of 3/9 signals deteriorating financial strength relative to its peers. Conversely, the Beneish M-Score of -2.20 offers some reassurance regarding earnings quality, implying a lower probability of manipulation compared to firms with scores near zero or positive values.
Valuation metrics suggest the market is pricing in moderate growth expectations that may not align with current capital efficiency. Trading at 19.9x forward earnings, the multiple appears elevated when weighed against an ROIC-WACC spread that generates negative economic value add. Without a clear inflection point where operating leverage improves net margins or if revenue growth accelerates materially, the current valuation implies a required return premium that is difficult to justify given the -2.6% capital destruction rate. The disconnect between modest profitability and a nearly 20x multiple indicates investors are betting on future margin expansion rather than current cash flow generation capabilities.
Risk assessment relies heavily on monitoring whether the negative ROIC-WACC spread can be reversed, as sustained value destruction poses a significant downside risk to shareholder equity. While the low Beneish score mitigates immediate concerns over financial statement fraud, the combination of a weak Piotroski F-Score and a Z-score hovering near distress thresholds warrants close scrutiny of balance sheet stability during economic downturns. The market's willingness to sustain a 19.9x P/E in this environment suggests confidence in future operational improvements, yet the current data points to an asset base that is not generating sufficient returns to support such a valuation multiple without significant strategic shifts or margin recovery.
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.
Balance Sheet Health
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 MDYV or IJJ, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell WCC shares regardless of WCC's individual fundamentals. We estimate $1.6B of passive capital is structurally linked to WCC 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 WCC to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If WCC (WCC) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies RELIANCE INC (RS) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with WCC. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 17 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
WCC Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest WCC Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 16 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
WCC Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does WCC convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
WCC converts 2% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a low conversion rate suggesting heavy reinvestment. This may indicate a growth phase (building capacity) or structural capital intensity. The 98% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-2.6%), 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 | 238 | $350.59 | $83,440.42 |
| 2026-05-05 | 4,397 | $346.66 | $1.5M |
| 2026-05-04 | 4,271 | $354.59 | $1.5M |
| 2026-05-01 | 447 | $349.12 | $156,056.64 |
| 2026-04-28 | 1,196 | $315.57 | $377,421.72 |
| 2026-04-20 | 543 | $319.06 | $173,249.58 |
| 2026-04-15 | 60 | $310.11 | $18,606.6 |
| 2026-04-02 | 17 | $282.46 | $4,801.82 |
| 2026-03-27 | 36 | $265.98 | $9,575.28 |
| 2026-03-25 | 56 | $273.50 | $15,316 |
| 2026-03-12 | 8,335 | $265.27 | $2.2M |
| 2026-03-06 | 8 | $281.84 | $2,254.72 |
| 2026-03-02 | 998 | $289.50 | $288,921 |
| 2026-02-27 | 156 | $295.84 | $46,151.04 |
| 2026-02-23 | 200 | $296.99 | $59,398 |
| 2026-02-17 | 3,268 | $307.10 | $1.0M |
| 2026-02-06 | 2,283 | $299.49 | $683,735.67 |
| 2026-02-05 | 4,705 | $301.37 | $1.4M |
| 2026-02-03 | 236 | $297.80 | $70,280.8 |
| 2026-01-29 | 382 | $291.30 | $111,276.6 |
| 2026-01-22 | 22 | $285.44 | $6,279.68 |
| 2026-01-20 | 1,023 | $281.63 | $288,107.49 |
| 2026-01-06 | 4 | $266.86 | $1,067.44 |
| 2025-12-31 | 10,419 | $249.79 | $2.6M |
| 2025-12-24 | 1,534 | $252.58 | $387,457.72 |
| 2025-12-22 | 15,049 | $251.41 | $3.8M |
| 2025-12-18 | 20 | $250.39 | $5,007.8 |
| 2025-12-16 | 56 | $258.84 | $14,495.04 |
| 2025-11-14 | 2,897 | $258.01 | $747,454.97 |
| 2025-11-03 | 763 | $259.53 | $198,021.39 |
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 WCC 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.