FSLY (FSLY)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 3.1. DCF fair value of $6 implies 76% downside based on model assumptions.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics reveal a severe disconnect between top-line expansion and bottom-line viability, characterized by an ROIC-WACC spread of -14.7% that signals value destruction rather than capital efficiency. While the DuPont decomposition highlights robust asset turnover at 0.42x and moderate leverage via an equity multiplier of 1.61x, these are insufficient to offset a net margin contraction to -19.5%, driving total ROE negative at -13.1%. Despite this profitability crisis, the Beneish M-Score of -3.20 suggests low earnings manipulation risk, and the Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 indicates moderate financial strength relative to peers; however, these defensive metrics cannot reconcile with the Altman Z-Score proximity to distress or the persistent negative returns on invested capital.
Valuation models further underscore the tension between current pricing and intrinsic worth derived from cash flow projections. The DCF analysis assigns a fair value of $6, implying that the market is currently discounting the stock by 76.2% relative to this model's output based on an assumed ten-year free cash flow growth rate of 21.2%. This significant gap suggests either extreme pessimism regarding future margin normalization or skepticism about the sustainability of revenue growth in a sector where profitability remains elusive, as evidenced by the weak profitability factor (RMW) loading of -0.889 against the value factor tilt.
Risk-adjusted performance metrics present a complex picture for risk-aware investors. Although the stock exhibits an anomalous annual Fama-French alpha of 26.50%, potentially reflecting momentum or short-term mispricing, this is counterbalanced by substantial insider selling totaling over $41 million in net outflows during the last ninety days. The combination of negative profitability signals and heavy internal capital flight suggests that while historical pricing may have rewarded risk tolerance recently, current fundamentals do not support a reversion to mean without significant operational turnaround or margin expansion.
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 15% YoY revenue.
Sensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6.3% | 8.3% | 10.3% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $8 | $5 | $3 |
| 3% | $10 | $6 | $4 |
| 4% | $14 | $7 | $5 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $20.77.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=8.3%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $6 (-76.2%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current trading environment for FSLY presents a complex risk profile characterized by significant volatility relative to its price level of $17.12. Without specific drawdown metrics or volume data, the fragility of this momentum remains ambiguous; high intraday swings often suggest that recent gains are susceptible to sharp reversals rather than reflecting deep structural strength. In such scenarios, technical setups frequently indicate a market where sentiment is highly reactive to minor catalysts, potentially creating false breakout patterns that trap traders chasing short-term moves. The absence of corroborating fundamental data in this snapshot further complicates the assessment, leaving it unclear whether price action is driven by sustainable earnings expectations or speculative liquidity flows. Consequently, the risk dynamics appear precarious if recent upward movements lack a broadening base of institutional participation. A technical setup defined primarily by erratic price fluctuations and limited trend confirmation usually signals that downside protection may be thin during periods of market stress. Investors must weigh whether the current valuation at $17.12 represents an overextension given the observed volatility, or if it is merely a pause in a larger consolidation phase. Ultimately, the data suggests caution regarding aggressive positioning until clearer signs of trend stability emerge, as fragile momentum often collapses when external headwinds materialize.
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.
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.
Fama-French 5-Factor Exposure
Academic factor model decomposition — what's really driving this stock's returns.
Fama-French 5-Factor Model. Data: Kenneth French Data Library. Regression over 3 years of daily returns.
Fundamentals
Passive Flow Attribution
ETF Draft EffectWhen investors buy or sell ETFs like HACK or VFMO, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell FSLY shares regardless of FSLY's individual fundamentals. We estimate $184M of passive capital is structurally linked to FSLY through 5 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on FSLY's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 5 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in FSLY to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If FSLY (FSLY) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies NVIDIA Corp. (NVDA) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with FSLY. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 5 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
FSLY Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 13 FSLY shares, reducing daily market volatility.
FSLY (FSLY) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 2.8% of the Amplify Cybersecurity ETF (HACK) and 0.1% of the VFMO (VFMO). Across 6 tracked ETFs, approximately 12M shares (7.6% of float) are held by passive funds and rarely trade on the open market. As passive ownership grows, index inclusion changes may increasingly drive price discovery.
ETFs with Highest FSLY Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 6 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
FSLY 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 FSLY over the past year sits near $8.43 (11% of 252-day volume). The current price of $20.77 trades 146.4% above this institutional floor — a sign of upside momentum, though a pullback to the POC zone is a common reversion target.
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.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-11 | 18,404 | $20.51 | $377,466.04 |
| 2026-05-08 | 29,027 | $19.50 | $566,026.5 |
| 2026-05-04 | 13,249 | $28.07 | $371,899.43 |
| 2026-04-28 | 1,356 | $25.80 | $34,984.8 |
| 2026-04-23 | 1,514 | $25.19 | $38,137.66 |
| 2026-04-21 | 1,179 | $25.41 | $29,958.39 |
| 2026-04-20 | 6,800 | $24.56 | $167,008 |
| 2026-04-17 | 2,554 | $24.88 | $63,543.52 |
| 2026-04-15 | 1,946 | $20.95 | $40,768.7 |
| 2026-04-13 | 1,180 | $23.07 | $27,222.6 |
| 2026-04-10 | 18,428 | $29.46 | $542,888.88 |
| 2026-04-06 | 7,522 | $33.50 | $251,987 |
| 2026-04-01 | 12,370 | $29.06 | $359,472.2 |
| 2026-03-26 | 282 | $29.79 | $8,400.78 |
| 2026-03-24 | 48,189 | $28.75 | $1.4M |
| 2026-03-23 | 167,525 | $25.20 | $4.2M |
| 2026-03-20 | 51,871 | $26.45 | $1.4M |
| 2026-03-19 | 51,269 | $26.88 | $1.4M |
| 2026-03-16 | 33,896 | $24.58 | $833,163.68 |
| 2026-03-12 | 165,074 | $24.05 | $4.0M |
| 2026-03-09 | 4,600 | $20.14 | $92,644 |
| 2026-03-02 | 2,449 | $19.12 | $46,824.88 |
| 2026-02-27 | 700 | $17.96 | $12,572 |
| 2026-02-26 | 3,937 | $18.15 | $71,456.55 |
| 2026-02-24 | 584 | $17.00 | $9,928 |
| 2026-02-19 | 14 | $18.83 | $263.62 |
| 2026-02-17 | 4,382 | $18.26 | $80,015.32 |
| 2026-02-13 | 50 | $16.04 | $802 |
| 2026-02-11 | 264 | $9.09 | $2,399.76 |
| 2026-01-29 | 3,506 | $9.92 | $34,779.52 |
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 | |
| CGNX | 0.552 | 0.625 | Moderate |
| AKAM | 0.507 | 0.503 | Moderate |
| DDOG | 0.376 | 0.398 | Moderate |
| IRDM | 0.345 | 0.436 | Moderate |
| EQIX | 0.335 | 0.460 | Moderate |
| NET | 0.310 | 0.315 | Moderate |
| IRM | 0.306 | 0.324 | Moderate |
| PH | 0.278 | 0.186 | Low correlation |
| WCN | -0.275 | -0.341 | Inverse / hedge |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare FSLY 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.