KRMN (KRMN)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 9.7. Beneish M-Score of -1.98 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 capital allocation efficiency for this entity is critically impaired, evidenced by a negative ROIC-WACC spread of -4.7%, indicating that the company destroys value relative to its cost of capital despite reporting robust top-line expansion. While revenue growth accelerates at 36.6% year-over-year and gross margins remain healthy at 40.3%, these gains are insufficient to offset weak operating leverage, resulting in a net margin compression to just 3.7%. The DuPont decomposition suggests that earnings power is not yet translating into sustainable profitability; instead, the business relies heavily on growth velocity rather than operational efficiency or financial leverage to drive returns. Although the Altman Z-Score of 9.7 signals low bankruptcy risk and the Beneish M-Score of -1.98 points to a lack of aggressive earnings manipulation, the Piotroski F-Score of 4/9 reflects moderate fundamental strength with no clear trend toward financial improvement or deterioration over the recent evaluation period.
Valuation metrics reveal an extreme disconnect between current pricing and historical norms, as well as sector comparables, driven by the astronomical P/E ratio of 615.0x. This multiple implies that the market is pricing in a perpetual hyper-growth trajectory with zero allowance for margin decay or economic headwinds, effectively treating any deviation from the 36.6% revenue growth rate as a catastrophic failure scenario. A traditional DCF framework would likely yield a negative fair value given the capital destruction inherent in the -4.7% spread and negligible net margins, suggesting that current share prices are sustained entirely by speculative momentum rather than intrinsic cash flow generation potential. The disparity between the high-growth narrative and the fundamental inability to generate returns above the cost of equity creates significant downside asymmetry if growth rates normalize even modestly below expectations.
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
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 XAR or VBK, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell KRMN shares regardless of KRMN's individual fundamentals. We estimate $443M of passive capital is structurally linked to KRMN through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on KRMN'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 KRMN to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If KRMN (KRMN) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies ROCKET LAB CORP (RKLB) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with KRMN. 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.
KRMN Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest KRMN Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 8 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
KRMN Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does KRMN convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
KRMN converts -35% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, negative FCF conversion — the company is consuming cash faster than it generates EBITDA, which is unsustainable long-term. The 135% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-4.7%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-12 | 85 | $58.82 | $4,999.7 |
| 2026-05-01 | 25,972 | $67.98 | $1.8M |
| 2026-04-24 | 498 | $76.60 | $38,146.8 |
| 2026-04-20 | 7,978 | $83.58 | $666,801.24 |
| 2026-03-31 | 1,164 | $74.82 | $87,090.48 |
| 2026-03-30 | 136 | $84.07 | $11,433.52 |
| 2026-03-27 | 27,433 | $86.01 | $2.4M |
| 2026-03-25 | 164 | $101.84 | $16,701.76 |
| 2026-03-24 | 52,438 | $102.39 | $5.4M |
| 2026-03-23 | 114,752 | $99.38 | $11.4M |
| 2026-03-20 | 1,105 | $105.95 | $117,074.75 |
| 2026-03-17 | 1,923 | $104.08 | $200,145.84 |
| 2026-03-13 | 7,342 | $98.98 | $726,711.16 |
| 2026-03-06 | 9,310 | $97.14 | $904,373.4 |
| 2026-03-05 | 9 | $98.88 | $889.92 |
| 2026-03-04 | 13,737 | $91.11 | $1.3M |
| 2026-03-02 | 32,862 | $88.11 | $2.9M |
| 2026-02-26 | 75 | $83.44 | $6,258 |
| 2026-02-25 | 1,570 | $83.60 | $131,252 |
| 2026-02-20 | 620 | $88.46 | $54,845.2 |
| 2026-02-19 | 160,527 | $81.00 | $13.0M |
| 2026-02-17 | 155,325 | $75.79 | $11.8M |
| 2026-02-13 | 153,509 | $78.71 | $12.1M |
| 2026-02-12 | 51,971 | $79.52 | $4.1M |
| 2026-02-10 | 11,400 | $97.47 | $1.1M |
| 2026-02-09 | 4,845 | $95.36 | $462,019.2 |
| 2026-02-06 | 961 | $89.78 | $86,278.58 |
| 2026-02-04 | 24,505 | $111.72 | $2.7M |
| 2026-02-02 | 5 | $103.80 | $519 |
| 2026-01-23 | 9,878 | $111.61 | $1.1M |
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 KRMN 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.