LEU (LEU)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 4/9, Altman Z 2.6. DCF fair value of $89 implies 54% downside based on model assumptions.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics reveal a significant divergence between profitability generation and capital efficiency, characterized by an ROIC-WACC spread of -7.0%, indicating that the company is currently destroying value relative to its cost of capital despite maintaining healthy gross margins at 26.2% and net margins at 17.3%. This erosion in economic quality is underscored by a Piotroski F-Score of 4/9, suggesting moderate financial strength with potential weaknesses in balance sheet or profitability trends, while the Altman Z-Score of 2.6 places the firm in the "gray zone" regarding bankruptcy risk, signaling caution rather than clear distress. Although the Beneish M-Score of -3.10 points to low earnings manipulation risk, the inability to generate returns exceeding the hurdle rate undermines the sustainability of these margins over time.
Valuation metrics present a stark premium that appears disconnected from current operational performance and intrinsic value estimates. The stock trades at 52.1x forward earnings, which is 162% above its five-year historical average and significantly exceeds typical sector multiples for firms with such limited growth momentum, evidenced by merely 1.5% year-over-year revenue expansion. This aggressive pricing implies the market is anticipating a sustained acceleration in free cash flow to justify the multiple, yet this expectation conflicts directly with DCF analysis which prices fair value at $89 and calculates an upside of -53.7%. The implied ten-year FCF growth rate required to support current levels sits at 30.9%, a trajectory that lacks empirical backing given the stagnant top-line performance.
The risk-reward profile is skewed heavily toward downside potential, as the combination of negative capital returns and a substantial valuation gap suggests the market may be pricing in an unrealistic growth narrative rather than fundamental improvement. While the low Beneish score offers some reassurance regarding earnings integrity, the structural inability to outperform the cost of equity creates a headwind that could pressure multiples further if revenue growth fails to accelerate materially from its current 1.5% pace. Investors must weigh whether the extreme valuation premium can be sustained absent evidence of margin expansion or operational leverage that would narrow the wide ROIC-WACC spread.
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 2% YoY revenue.
Sensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8.9% | 10.9% | 12.9% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $99 | $84 | $75 |
| 3% | $107 | $89 | $78 |
| 4% | $119 | $95 | $81 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $199.13.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.9%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $89 (-53.7%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedLEU is currently trading at $206.64, a position that warrants analysis against its surrounding moving average envelope to assess potential mean-reversion dynamics. Without specific data regarding the exact location of the short-term and long-term simple moving averages or their respective upper and lower bands, it is impossible to definitively characterize whether this price point represents an overextended condition or a consolidation phase relative to recent trend history. If historical volatility suggests the current level sits near the outer limits of the standard deviation envelope, the setup might imply a heightened probability of a corrective move back toward the mean; conversely, if the price remains comfortably within the central channel, it could indicate continued adherence to the prevailing trend without immediate reversal pressure. The absence of additional context regarding recent momentum shifts or volume anomalies further limits the ability to determine the strength of any potential bounce or fade scenario at this specific juncture. Market participants observing this level must weigh the current valuation against the broader statistical distribution of past prices over similar timeframes to gauge if a reversion is statistically probable. Ultimately, whether $206.64 serves as an attractive entry for long positions or a ceiling for short strategies depends entirely on how closely this figure aligns with the calculated support and resistance thresholds derived from the asset's own historical price action.
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.
Dividend History
| Date | Amount | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2005-11-22 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2005-08-24 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2005-05-25 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2005-02-23 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2004-11-23 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2004-08-25 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2004-05-26 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2004-02-25 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2003-11-25 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2003-08-20 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2003-05-21 | $37.9121 | 0.0% |
| 2003-02-26 | $37.9121 | 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 XME or VDE, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell LEU shares regardless of LEU's individual fundamentals. We estimate $206M of passive capital is structurally linked to LEU through 4 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on LEU's daily trading dynamics.
Passive exposure = Σ (ETF AUM × stock weight in ETF) across 4 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is larger (includes mutual funds). Not investment advice.
ETF Contagion Visualizer
Simulate a price drop in LEU to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If LEU (LEU) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with LEU. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 4 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
LEU Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 15 LEU shares, reducing daily market volatility.
LEU (LEU) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 3.8% of the XME (XME) and 0.2% of the VDE (VDE). Across 4 tracked ETFs, approximately 1M shares (6.5% 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 LEU Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 4 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
LEU 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 LEU over the past year sits near $199.99 (17% of 252-day volume). The current price of $199.13 sits 0.4% below the POC — suggesting potential mean-reversion upside if institutional demand reasserts at this level. The highly concentrated volume profile (17% 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.
LEU Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does LEU convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
LEU converts 29% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a moderate conversion rate — significant EBITDA is consumed by capital expenditures, working capital changes, or interest payments. The 71% reinvestment rate signals aggressive capacity expansion. However, the ROIC-WACC spread is negative (-7.0%), 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-13 | 8,133 | $202.34 | $1.6M |
| 2026-05-11 | 1,279 | $207.33 | $265,175.07 |
| 2026-05-08 | 3,951 | $206.30 | $815,091.3 |
| 2026-05-06 | 9,858 | $206.04 | $2.0M |
| 2026-05-05 | 796 | $206.92 | $164,708.32 |
| 2026-05-04 | 3,092 | $206.64 | $638,930.88 |
| 2026-04-29 | 11,178 | $205.59 | $2.3M |
| 2026-04-23 | 1,172 | $217.08 | $254,417.76 |
| 2026-04-21 | 8,215 | $199.61 | $1.6M |
| 2026-04-20 | 875 | $203.63 | $178,176.25 |
| 2026-04-15 | 170 | $193.11 | $32,828.7 |
| 2026-04-10 | 4,903 | $180.17 | $883,373.51 |
| 2026-04-09 | 2,122 | $190.13 | $403,455.86 |
| 2026-04-06 | 526 | $183.21 | $96,368.46 |
| 2026-04-02 | 3,351 | $183.16 | $613,769.16 |
| 2026-04-01 | 12,078 | $173.59 | $2.1M |
| 2026-03-31 | 23,026 | $168.52 | $3.9M |
| 2026-03-30 | 15,307 | $182.90 | $2.8M |
| 2026-03-27 | 366 | $193.31 | $70,751.46 |
| 2026-03-23 | 23,000 | $186.76 | $4.3M |
| 2026-03-20 | 26,911 | $205.09 | $5.5M |
| 2026-03-19 | 28,330 | $208.46 | $5.9M |
| 2026-03-18 | 27,224 | $213.60 | $5.8M |
| 2026-03-17 | 25,603 | $212.84 | $5.4M |
| 2026-03-16 | 32,365 | $209.64 | $6.8M |
| 2026-03-11 | 480 | $200.84 | $96,403.2 |
| 2026-03-03 | 1,566 | $207.99 | $325,712.34 |
| 2026-03-02 | 8,659 | $202.59 | $1.8M |
| 2026-02-27 | 2,893 | $210.96 | $610,307.28 |
| 2026-02-23 | 968 | $203.73 | $197,210.64 |
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 | |
| UEC | 0.527 | 0.612 | Moderate |
| BWXT | 0.518 | 0.612 | Moderate |
| RKLB | 0.485 | 0.638 | Moderate |
| CW | 0.478 | 0.534 | Moderate |
| HOOD | 0.451 | 0.542 | Moderate |
| SEI | 0.451 | 0.522 | Moderate |
| ASTS | 0.447 | 0.582 | Moderate |
| PWR | 0.439 | 0.578 | Moderate |
| BE | 0.427 | 0.567 | Moderate |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare LEU 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.