LSTR (LSTR)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 5/9, Altman Z 9.9.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics of LSTR present a dichotomy between robust capital efficiency and deteriorating top-line momentum. While the company generates an ROIC of 14.3%, indicating strong value creation relative to cost of equity, this metric is supported by a high-quality financial profile with an Altman Z-Score of 9.9 and a Beneish M-Score of -2.89, signaling low distress risk and minimal earnings manipulation concerns. However, the DuPont decomposition reveals that returns are driven primarily by leverage rather than operational excellence or margin expansion, evidenced by net margins compressing to just 2.4% amid revenue contraction of -1.6%. This decline in sales growth is reflected in a mediocre Piotroski F-Score of 5/9, suggesting the balance sheet strength and profitability trends are not currently improving despite the solid Z-score.
Valuation metrics suggest significant market divergence from intrinsic value models. The stock trades at a premium P/E multiple of 47.8x, which appears disconnected from the current fundamentals given the negative revenue trajectory and thin net margins. In contrast, DCF analysis implies a fair value of $38, indicating that the market price likely exceeds the present value of expected future cash flows under current assumptions. This disparity suggests investors are pricing in aggressive growth expectations or intangible assets not captured by standard multiple comparisons, creating a potential mean-reversion scenario if earnings quality does not improve to justify such high multiples.
The risk/reward profile is skewed toward downside pressure unless operational turnaround occurs. The combination of shrinking revenues and razor-thin margins limits the room for error in future growth assumptions required to sustain current valuations. While the low M-Score provides some comfort regarding accounting integrity, the fundamental deterioration in sales flow challenges the long-term sustainability of the 14.3% ROIC. Investors must weigh whether the high valuation premium accounts for a successful strategic pivot or represents an overextension relative to the company's current cash-generating capabilities.
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.
Sensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $45 | $35 | $30 |
| 3% | $51 | $38 | $31 |
| 4% | $60 | $42 | $34 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $212.94.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $38 (+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.
Dividend History
| Date | Amount | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-19 | $0.4000 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02-18 | $0.4000 | -80.0% |
| 2026-01-06 | $2.0000 | +400.0% |
| 2025-11-18 | $0.4000 | 0.0% |
| 2025-08-19 | $0.4000 | 0.0% |
| 2025-06-05 | $0.4000 | +11.1% |
| 2025-02-18 | $0.3600 | -82.0% |
| 2025-01-07 | $2.0000 | +455.6% |
| 2024-11-19 | $0.3600 | 0.0% |
| 2024-08-20 | $0.3600 | +9.1% |
| 2024-05-07 | $0.3300 | 0.0% |
| 2024-02-09 | $0.3300 | -83.5% |
Dividend and split data from SEC filings and market data. Amounts are per share, not adjusted for splits. 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 XTN or VFQY, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell LSTR shares regardless of LSTR's individual fundamentals. We estimate $456M of passive capital is structurally linked to LSTR through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on LSTR'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 LSTR to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If LSTR (LSTR) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies RXO INC (RXO) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with LSTR. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 17 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
LSTR Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 13 LSTR shares, reducing daily market volatility.
LSTR (LSTR) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 2.9% of the XTN (XTN) and 0.5% of the VFQY (VFQY). Across 17 tracked ETFs, approximately 3M 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 LSTR Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 17 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
LSTR 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 LSTR over the past year sits near $129.06 (14% of 252-day volume). The current price of $212.94 trades 65.0% above this institutional floor — a sign of upside momentum, though a pullback to the POC zone is a common reversion target. The highly concentrated volume profile (14% 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.
LSTR Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does LSTR convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
LSTR converts 99% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, an exceptional conversion rate indicating an asset-light business model with minimal capital reinvestment drag.
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 | 3,991 | $175.74 | $701,378.34 |
| 2026-04-20 | 56 | $172.87 | $9,680.72 |
| 2026-04-10 | 691 | $170.41 | $117,753.31 |
| 2026-04-08 | 3 | $166.84 | $500.52 |
| 2026-04-07 | 304 | $165.28 | $50,245.12 |
| 2026-03-31 | 174 | $156.96 | $27,311.04 |
| 2026-03-26 | 546 | $157.07 | $85,760.22 |
| 2026-03-03 | 22,144 | $163.66 | $3.6M |
| 2026-03-02 | 133 | $162.95 | $21,672.35 |
| 2026-02-23 | 19 | $153.14 | $2,909.66 |
| 2026-02-19 | 58 | $147.33 | $8,545.14 |
| 2026-02-18 | 23 | $144.15 | $3,315.45 |
| 2026-02-17 | 22 | $142.36 | $3,131.92 |
| 2026-02-05 | 1 | $161.44 | $161.44 |
| 2026-02-04 | 1,462 | $158.87 | $232,267.94 |
| 2026-01-23 | 10 | $157.84 | $1,578.4 |
| 2026-01-07 | 6,320 | $148.86 | $940,795.2 |
| 2026-01-05 | 595 | $146.78 | $87,334.1 |
| 2025-12-26 | 35 | $144.64 | $5,062.4 |
| 2025-12-24 | 35 | $144.87 | $5,070.45 |
| 2025-12-12 | 6,050 | $148.68 | $899,514 |
| 2025-12-11 | 2,097 | $148.75 | $311,928.75 |
| 2025-12-08 | 15 | $142.04 | $2,130.6 |
| 2025-11-20 | 18 | $123.37 | $2,220.66 |
| 2025-11-17 | 182 | $125.90 | $22,913.8 |
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 LSTR 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.