FDS (FDS)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 5/9, Altman Z 4.2. DCF fair value of $314 implies 39% upside from current prices based on model assumptions.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of FDS reveal a capital-efficient operator generating returns significantly above typical cost of equity, evidenced by an ROIC of 16.2% and a DuPont-decomposed ROE of 27.3%. This strong profitability is driven primarily by exceptional net margins at 25.7%, supported by healthy gross margins near 53%, rather than asset turnover or financial leverage which remain moderate at 0.54x and 1.97x respectively. Quality metrics further validate the business model, with a robust Beneish M-Score of -2.40 suggesting low earnings manipulation risk, though the Piotroski F-Score of 5/9 indicates only average financial strength relative to peers.
Valuation analysis presents a compelling divergence between current market pricing and intrinsic value estimates derived from discounted cash flow modeling. The stock trades at a P/E multiple of 13.6x, which appears compressed given the company's ability to generate high-margin returns on equity. DCF calculations imply a fair value of $243, suggesting approximately 11.8% upside potential based on an assumed ten-year free cash flow growth rate of just 4.8%. This valuation gap suggests the market may be pricing in lower growth expectations or assigning a discount to sector-specific headwinds not fully reflected in the intrinsic model inputs.
Risk assessment is tempered by notable insider activity, with net selling totaling $1.52 million over the past ninety days. While this cash outflow from management could signal concerns about near-term execution or valuation levels, it must be weighed against the company's strong profitability metrics and low manipulation risk scores. The combination of solid fundamentals, a potential DCF premium, and recent insider distribution creates a scenario where investors must weigh long-term value creation against short-term leadership confidence signals before forming a position view.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
Interactive5-year two-stage DCF. Terminal growth 3%. Default sliders match the pre-computed base case. Drag to explore scenarios. Not investment advice.
The growth rate the market implicitly expects over the next 10 years to justify today's price. Compare with historical growth of 5% YoY revenue.
Sensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6.5% | 8.5% | 10.5% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $406 | $272 | $200 |
| 3% | $510 | $314 | $223 |
| 4% | $696 | $376 | $252 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $255.82.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=8.5%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $314 (+38.9%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current trading level of $221.93 for FDS sits within a context where the interplay between price action and underlying volatility defines the immediate risk landscape. Without specific historical drawdown metrics or variance data to quantify recent instability, the structural integrity of this momentum remains ambiguous; it could represent a consolidation phase following significant correction or an early-stage breakout susceptible to sharp reversals if support levels weaken. The absence of explicit fundamental backdrop details further limits the ability to distinguish whether current price movements are driven by sustainable earnings trajectories or transient market sentiment. In such environments, technical setups often exhibit fragility where minor shifts in volume or news flow can disproportionately impact the asset's trajectory. If the recent upward movement lacks deep historical support or is occurring against a neutral-to-negative fundamental backdrop, the risk of a mean reversion increases significantly. Conversely, if volatility has been compressing prior to this level, the potential for an expansion exists but carries inherent uncertainty regarding duration and magnitude. The primary technical challenge here involves assessing whether the current price action represents a durable trend or a temporary deviation that may correct quickly upon encountering resistance from broader market conditions. Ultimately, the risk dynamics suggest a need for caution when interpreting short-term momentum without corroborating data on drawdown history or fundamental catalysts. The setup appears to be in a transitional state where the distinction between structural strength and fragile gains is not yet clear from price alone. Market participants must weigh the likelihood of continued appreciation against the possibility that current levels are merely a
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
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.
Dividend History
| Date | Amount | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-29 | $1.1600 | +5.5% |
| 2026-02-27 | $1.1000 | 0.0% |
| 2025-11-28 | $1.1000 | 0.0% |
| 2025-08-29 | $1.1000 | 0.0% |
| 2025-05-30 | $1.1000 | +5.8% |
| 2025-02-28 | $1.0400 | 0.0% |
| 2024-11-29 | $1.0400 | 0.0% |
| 2024-08-30 | $1.0400 | 0.0% |
| 2024-05-31 | $1.0400 | +6.1% |
| 2024-02-28 | $0.9800 | 0.0% |
| 2023-11-29 | $0.9800 | 0.0% |
| 2023-08-30 | $0.9800 | 0.0% |
Dividend and split data from SEC filings and market data. Amounts are per share, not adjusted for splits. Source: yfinance.
Risk Profile
Sharpe = risk-adjusted return (higher is better). Max drawdown = largest peak-to-trough decline. 1,200+ trading days.
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 NOBL or SDY, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell FDS shares regardless of FDS's individual fundamentals. We estimate $1.3B of passive capital is structurally linked to FDS 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 FDS to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If FDS (FDS) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC (VZ) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with FDS. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 26 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
FDS Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 6 FDS shares, reducing daily market volatility.
FDS (FDS) exerts notable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 1.1% of the ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) and 0.4% of the SDY (SDY). Across 27 tracked ETFs, approximately 6M shares (16.0% of float) are held by passive funds and rarely trade on the open market. This level of passive ownership means index rebalances can create outsized volume events.
ETFs with Highest FDS Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 27 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
FDS Institutional Volume Profile
252-day volume distribution by price level. The Point of Control (POC) marks — the price where the most institutional volume transacted — an implicit support/resistance floor.
The highest-volume price zone for FDS over the past year sits near $284.43 (18% of 252-day volume). The current price of $255.82 sits 10.1% below the POC — suggesting potential mean-reversion upside if institutional demand reasserts at this level. The highly concentrated volume profile (18% at POC) indicates strong consensus on fair value — institutional participants have repeatedly transacted near this price.
Volume Profile computed from 252 trading days of OHLCV data. Volume allocated to price bins proportionally based on daily high-low range. Not investment advice.
FDS Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does FDS convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
FDS converts 64% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 7.7% confirms that reinvested capital creates 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-13 | 5 | $215.92 | $1,079.6 |
| 2026-05-05 | 4 | $224.44 | $897.76 |
| 2026-05-04 | 47,095 | $227.58 | $10.7M |
| 2026-05-01 | 47,094 | $227.58 | $10.7M |
| 2026-04-29 | 1,030 | $229.56 | $236,446.8 |
| 2026-04-23 | 182 | $242.72 | $44,175.04 |
| 2026-04-20 | 35,230 | $232.73 | $8.2M |
| 2026-04-17 | 11,153 | $231.85 | $2.6M |
| 2026-04-13 | 28 | $211.60 | $5,924.8 |
| 2026-04-02 | 1 | $224.86 | $224.86 |
| 2026-03-25 | 170 | $197.40 | $33,558 |
| 2026-03-23 | 256 | $209.27 | $53,573.12 |
| 2026-03-13 | 1 | $203.60 | $203.6 |
| 2026-02-27 | 13 | $214.27 | $2,785.51 |
| 2026-02-25 | 3,424 | $201.49 | $689,901.76 |
| 2026-02-12 | 29 | $193.76 | $5,619.04 |
| 2026-01-30 | 16,588 | $252.79 | $4.2M |
| 2026-01-28 | 83,066 | $268.66 | $22.3M |
| 2026-01-13 | 7 | $296.92 | $2,078.44 |
| 2026-01-08 | 396 | $292.95 | $116,008.2 |
| 2025-12-29 | 923 | $292.13 | $269,635.99 |
| 2025-12-22 | 6,003 | $288.54 | $1.7M |
| 2025-12-15 | 73 | $292.47 | $21,350.31 |
| 2025-12-03 | 25,497 | $278.28 | $7.1M |
| 2025-12-02 | 25,519 | $277.13 | $7.1M |
| 2025-11-25 | 4,385 | $271.76 | $1.2M |
| 2025-11-19 | 4,300 | $272.11 | $1.2M |
| 2025-11-14 | 35 | $277.94 | $9,727.9 |
| 2025-11-12 | 14,907 | $271.56 | $4.0M |
| 2025-11-07 | 13,639 | $253.62 | $3.5M |
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.
Price Correlations
Statistical correlation of daily returns with other stocks. High correlations indicate stocks that move together; negative correlations can offer diversification.
| Peer | 252-Day (1Y) | 126-Day (6M) | Direction |
|---|---|---|---|
| WTGXX | NaN | NaN | |
| SPGI | 0.633 | 0.632 | Moderate |
| MCO | 0.600 | 0.591 | Moderate |
| VRSK | 0.560 | 0.602 | Moderate |
| NDAQ | 0.554 | 0.553 | Moderate |
| ADP | 0.513 | 0.574 | Moderate |
| ACN | 0.502 | 0.564 | Moderate |
| PAYX | 0.492 | 0.570 | Moderate |
| ROP | 0.488 | 0.524 | Moderate |
| PAYC | 0.471 | 0.573 | Moderate |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare FDS to Peers
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-02.
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.