WEN (WEN)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 4/9.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of WEN reveal a capital allocation environment where the ROIC-WACC spread is notably compressed at 6.1%, suggesting limited excess returns on invested capital relative to the cost of financing. This metric, combined with a declining revenue trajectory of -3.1% year-over-year, indicates that growth engines are currently underperforming despite maintaining healthy gross margins of 27.0%. The DuPont decomposition implies that profitability is being driven more by margin preservation than operational leverage or asset turnover efficiency, as evidenced by the shrinking top line. While the Beneish M-Score of -2.46 points to low earnings manipulation risk and a relatively clean financial statement structure, the Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 reflects moderate fundamental weakness, likely stemming from declining sales and potentially eroding asset quality or leverage ratios that are not explicitly detailed but implied by the score's midpoint status.
Valuation metrics suggest the market is pricing in significant downside pressure relative to intrinsic value estimates derived from discounted cash flow models, which indicate a fair value of $7. The current trading price appears disconnected from this DCF-implied target, reflecting investor skepticism regarding future growth prospects given the negative revenue momentum. This valuation gap implies that the stock is being traded at a substantial discount compared to its calculated fundamental worth, potentially compensating for the observed lack of capital efficiency and top-line contraction rather than anticipating a near-term turnaround in operational performance.
The synthesis of these factors presents a risk-reward profile where downside protection may be offered by low earnings manipulation scores, yet limited upside remains constrained until revenue trends stabilize or ROIC improves to generate meaningful spreads above the cost of equity. The divergence between current market pricing and DCF fair value creates an asymmetry that could favor long-term holders if fundamental deterioration halts, but the immediate trajectory suggests continued pressure on shareholder returns absent a reversal in growth dynamics.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $9 | $6 | $3 |
| 3% | $12 | $7 | $4 |
| 4% | $16 | $8 | $5 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $7 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
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 SLYV or DVY, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell WEN shares regardless of WEN's individual fundamentals. We estimate $49M of passive capital is structurally linked to WEN through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on WEN'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 WEN to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If WEN (WEN) 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 WEN. 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.
WEN Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest WEN Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 8 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
WEN Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does WEN convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
WEN converts 46% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The 54% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion.
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 | 643,989 | $8.19 | $5.3M |
| 2026-05-13 | 778,490 | $7.90 | $6.2M |
| 2026-05-12 | 16,245 | $6.76 | $109,816.2 |
| 2026-05-11 | 69,256 | $7.30 | $505,568.8 |
| 2026-05-08 | 242,111 | $6.95 | $1.7M |
| 2026-05-07 | 110,231 | $6.65 | $733,036.15 |
| 2026-05-06 | 693 | $6.61 | $4,580.73 |
| 2026-05-05 | 387,678 | $6.54 | $2.5M |
| 2026-05-04 | 416,728 | $6.70 | $2.8M |
| 2026-05-01 | 24,250 | $6.96 | $168,780 |
| 2026-04-30 | 236,846 | $6.76 | $1.6M |
| 2026-04-29 | 192,321 | $6.81 | $1.3M |
| 2026-04-28 | 408,678 | $6.90 | $2.8M |
| 2026-04-27 | 149,678 | $7.14 | $1.1M |
| 2026-04-24 | 822,008 | $6.93 | $5.7M |
| 2026-04-23 | 72,277 | $7.10 | $513,166.7 |
| 2026-04-22 | 528,227 | $7.11 | $3.8M |
| 2026-04-21 | 364,701 | $7.13 | $2.6M |
| 2026-04-20 | 84,031 | $6.95 | $584,015.45 |
| 2026-04-14 | 45,180 | $6.70 | $302,706 |
| 2026-04-13 | 35,290 | $6.89 | $243,148.1 |
| 2026-04-10 | 57,960 | $7.10 | $411,516 |
| 2026-04-08 | 33,849 | $6.89 | $233,219.61 |
| 2026-04-06 | 281,969 | $6.88 | $1.9M |
| 2026-04-01 | 18,511 | $6.95 | $128,651.45 |
| 2026-03-31 | 18,400 | $6.78 | $124,752 |
| 2026-03-30 | 42,545 | $6.80 | $289,306 |
| 2026-03-27 | 286 | $6.99 | $1,999.14 |
| 2026-03-25 | 214 | $7.10 | $1,519.4 |
| 2026-03-24 | 164 | $7.16 | $1,174.24 |
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 WEN 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.