QLYS (QLYS)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health metrics are strong: Piotroski 7/9, Altman Z 4.3 (above 3.0 safe zone threshold). DCF fair value of $341 implies 319% upside from current prices based on model assumptions.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe underlying economics demonstrate robust capital efficiency, evidenced by a 27.9% ROIC that generates a substantial +19.3% spread over the cost of equity at 8.6%. This high return on invested capital is primarily driven by exceptional margin expansion rather than leverage or asset turnover; specifically, gross margins sit at an elite 82.8%, while net margins remain formidable at 29.6%. Fundamental integrity appears strong with a Piotroski F-Score of 7/9 and a Beneish M-Score of -2.87 indicating low earnings manipulation risk, though the Altman Z-Score of 4.3 suggests adequate but not fortress-level solvency. Despite these attractive profitability metrics, the Profitability Factor (RMW) registers at -0.077, signaling that while margins are wide, they may be failing to translate into relative outperformance against peers in a factor-neutral environment.
Valuation dynamics present a significant divergence between current pricing and intrinsic value models. The stock trades at 15.3x earnings, representing a 39% discount to its five-year average of 23.2x, which implies the market is currently pricing in substantial downside or structural stagnation rather than growth. A DCF analysis suggests a fair value of $341 with an implied upside of approximately 318.9%, yet this aggressive valuation premium relies on assumptions that contradict recent cash flow trajectories; notably, the model inputs project negative ten-year free cash flow growth at -6.6%. This disconnect highlights a scenario where historical profitability does not necessarily align with future reinvestment capabilities required to sustain such high multiple compression or expansion.
Risk factors derived from factor models indicate underperformance relative to broad market benchmarks. The Fama-French Alpha stands at -16.76% annually, suggesting the security has consistently failed to generate excess returns after adjusting for risk premiums over time. While the Value Factor (HML) score of 0.063 remains neutral, indicating no significant tilt toward value or growth mispricing in that specific dimension, the persistent negative alpha and weak projected cash flow growth create a challenging risk-reward profile despite the apparent margin quality. Investors must weigh whether the current depressed valuation reflects temporary market dislocation or a fundamental deterioration in long-term capital generation capacity not fully captured by static profitability metrics.
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 10% YoY revenue.
Sensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 6.6% | 8.6% | 10.6% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $434 | $297 | $224 |
| 3% | $539 | $341 | $248 |
| 4% | $726 | $404 | $278 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $113.42.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=8.6%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $341 (+318.9%). 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.
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 XSW, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell QLYS shares regardless of QLYS's individual fundamentals. We estimate $227M of passive capital is structurally linked to QLYS through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on QLYS'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 QLYS to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If QLYS (QLYS) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Broadcom Inc (AVGO) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with QLYS. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 10 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
QLYS Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 13 QLYS shares, reducing daily market volatility.
QLYS (QLYS) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 3.5% of the Amplify Cybersecurity ETF (HACK) and 0.7% of the XSW (XSW). Across 10 tracked ETFs, approximately 3M shares (7.5% 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 QLYS Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 10 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
QLYS 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 QLYS over the past year sits near $133.20 (13% of 252-day volume). The current price of $113.42 sits 14.9% below the POC — suggesting potential mean-reversion upside if institutional demand reasserts at this level. The highly concentrated volume profile (13% 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.
QLYS Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does QLYS convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
QLYS converts 129% 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 19.3% 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 | 307 | $90.12 | $27,666.84 |
| 2026-05-08 | 4,462 | $94.97 | $423,756.14 |
| 2026-05-07 | 5,990 | $90.84 | $544,131.6 |
| 2026-04-30 | 381 | $89.60 | $34,137.6 |
| 2026-04-29 | 634 | $85.70 | $54,333.8 |
| 2026-04-27 | 59 | $84.34 | $4,976.06 |
| 2026-04-20 | 9,532 | $83.17 | $792,776.44 |
| 2026-04-17 | 7,952 | $84.09 | $668,683.68 |
| 2026-04-09 | 1 | $87.36 | $87.36 |
| 2026-04-08 | 181 | $88.24 | $15,971.44 |
| 2026-03-27 | 1 | $91.11 | $91.11 |
| 2026-03-24 | 1 | $97.34 | $97.34 |
| 2026-03-23 | 11 | $96.44 | $1,060.84 |
| 2026-03-17 | 47 | $94.99 | $4,464.53 |
| 2026-03-16 | 25 | $99.71 | $2,492.75 |
| 2026-03-11 | 398 | $95.38 | $37,961.24 |
| 2026-03-03 | 14 | $94.59 | $1,324.26 |
| 2026-02-06 | 419 | $127.81 | $53,552.39 |
| 2026-01-29 | 198 | $132.69 | $26,272.62 |
| 2026-01-20 | 1,052 | $134.57 | $141,567.64 |
| 2026-01-15 | 940 | $134.03 | $125,988.2 |
| 2026-01-14 | 2,913 | $133.14 | $387,836.82 |
| 2026-01-13 | 3,106 | $135.21 | $419,962.26 |
| 2026-01-12 | 3,833 | $133.15 | $510,363.95 |
| 2025-12-22 | 55,059 | $142.76 | $7.9M |
| 2025-12-12 | 112 | $152.31 | $17,058.72 |
| 2025-11-12 | 139 | $153.80 | $21,378.2 |
| 2025-11-06 | 180 | $146.13 | $26,303.4 |
| 2025-10-24 | 36 | $127.90 | $4,604.4 |
| 2025-10-14 | 331 | $127.91 | $42,338.21 |
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 | |
| TENB | 0.549 | 0.486 | Moderate |
| S | 0.456 | 0.428 | Moderate |
| ZS | 0.446 | 0.428 | Moderate |
| TOST | 0.440 | 0.473 | Moderate |
| ADSK | 0.428 | 0.394 | Moderate |
| CRWD | 0.427 | 0.393 | Moderate |
| OKTA | 0.425 | 0.441 | Moderate |
| PAYC | 0.423 | 0.359 | Moderate |
| NOW | 0.422 | 0.385 | Moderate |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare QLYS 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.