QSR (QSR)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe fundamental economics display a company generating solid returns through operational leverage rather than pure margin expansion, evidenced by an ROIC of 7.7% and a DuPont-decomposed ROE of 15.0%. This return profile is driven primarily by high financial leverage with an equity multiplier of 4.97x, while the asset turnover of 0.37x suggests a capital-intensive model where profitability relies heavily on efficient use of assets to sustain the 8.2% net margin and 33.9% gross margin. Integrity metrics reinforce this stability; a Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 indicates strong financial health, while a Beneish M-Score of -2.49 signals low probability of earnings manipulation, suggesting the reported growth trajectory is credible despite the aggressive leverage structure supporting the equity returns.
Valuation analysis reveals a divergence between current pricing and intrinsic value estimates derived from discounted cash flow modeling. The market appears to be discounting the stock relative to its calculated fair value of $24, which implies that future earnings potential must align with specific growth assumptions to justify the current multiple. While revenue is expanding at 12.2% year-over-year, providing a tailwind for margin maintenance and turnover efficiency, the gap between implied fair value and market price necessitates scrutiny regarding whether the sector average or historical valuation bands are currently constraining the equity's upside potential based on these fundamental drivers.
Risk assessment highlights significant divergence in insider positioning versus aggregate fundamentals. Despite the robust Piotroski score and positive revenue momentum of 12.2%, there is substantial net selling pressure from insiders totaling $37,429,638 over the last ninety days. This pronounced outflow by management or major shareholders introduces a counter-narrative to the otherwise healthy balance sheet metrics, potentially signaling concerns about near-term capital allocation or valuation levels that are not immediately apparent in standard profitability ratios alone.
Generated by LLM from quantitative data inputs. May contain inaccuracies. Not investment advice.
DCF Sandbox
InteractiveSensitivity Matrix
| TG ↓ / WACC → | 8% | 10% | 12% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $36 | $18 | $8 |
| 3% | $48 | $24 | $11 |
| 4% | $65 | $32 | $15 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs —.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.0%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $24 (+0.0%). Not investment advice.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
✅ Conservative payout — room for dividend increases.
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.
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 VIGI or ONEY, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell QSR shares regardless of QSR's individual fundamentals. We estimate $841M of passive capital is structurally linked to QSR through 8 tracked ETFs. Passive flows have a limited but growing influence on QSR'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 QSR to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If QSR (QSR) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies Royal Bank of Canada (RY) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 3 ETFs with QSR. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 14 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
QSR Ownership Dynamics
ETFs with Highest QSR Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 14 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
QSR Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does QSR convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
QSR converts 58% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment.
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 | 3,563 | $78.23 | $278,733.49 |
| 2026-05-11 | 4,027 | $79.71 | $320,992.17 |
| 2026-05-08 | 25,550 | $79.14 | $2.0M |
| 2026-05-07 | 308,174 | $77.20 | $23.8M |
| 2026-05-06 | 172 | $81.67 | $14,047.24 |
| 2026-05-05 | 1,515 | $80.05 | $121,275.75 |
| 2026-05-01 | 24,952 | $80.68 | $2.0M |
| 2026-04-29 | 74,703 | $78.20 | $5.8M |
| 2026-04-28 | 36,957 | $78.87 | $2.9M |
| 2026-04-27 | 30 | $80.90 | $2,427 |
| 2026-04-24 | 335,131 | $81.23 | $27.2M |
| 2026-04-23 | 372,498 | $79.00 | $29.4M |
| 2026-04-22 | 101 | $78.69 | $7,947.69 |
| 2026-04-21 | 20,517 | $78.91 | $1.6M |
| 2026-04-20 | 98,324 | $78.32 | $7.7M |
| 2026-04-17 | 16 | $77.61 | $1,241.76 |
| 2026-04-15 | 82,115 | $78.57 | $6.5M |
| 2026-04-10 | 14,546 | $76.87 | $1.1M |
| 2026-04-09 | 74,810 | $77.56 | $5.8M |
| 2026-04-07 | 499 | $77.23 | $38,537.77 |
| 2026-04-06 | 500 | $76.58 | $38,290 |
| 2026-04-02 | 139,097 | $75.10 | $10.4M |
| 2026-03-31 | 61,614 | $73.76 | $4.5M |
| 2026-03-30 | 2,949 | $71.42 | $210,617.58 |
| 2026-03-27 | 2,793 | $73.10 | $204,168.3 |
| 2026-03-25 | 321 | $73.85 | $23,705.85 |
| 2026-03-24 | 44 | $75.01 | $3,300.44 |
| 2026-03-23 | 174,426 | $73.75 | $12.9M |
| 2026-03-20 | 1,640 | $74.13 | $121,573.2 |
| 2026-03-19 | 158,894 | $74.26 | $11.8M |
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 QSR 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.