RMBS (RMBS)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicFinancial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 35.0.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe company demonstrates robust fundamental economics, characterized by a high ROIC of 15.9% that generates value above the cost of capital at 14.5%, albeit with a modest spread of +1.4%. This efficiency is underpinned by exceptional profitability metrics; a net margin of 32.6% and gross margin of 79.6% suggest strong pricing power or low variable costs, contributing significantly to the return on equity through high margins rather than leverage or asset turnover. Credit quality indicators reinforce this stability, with an Altman Z-Score of 35.0 indicating a very low probability of bankruptcy and a Beneish M-Score of -2.73 signaling that earnings are unlikely to be manipulated. The Piotroski F-Score of 6/9 further validates the firm's financial health and operational improvement trajectory over recent periods.
Valuation metrics present a distinct divergence between current market pricing and intrinsic value models. Trading at a P/E multiple of 40.0x, the stock commands a premium relative to typical growth valuations, implying that the market is pricing in aggressive future expansion consistent with its reported revenue growth rate of 27.1%. However, this high valuation stands in contrast to a DCF-derived fair value estimate of $57, which suggests that current share prices may exceed intrinsic worth if implied growth assumptions are not met or if risk premiums widen. The gap between the elevated multiple and the discounted cash flow model indicates potential overvaluation unless sustained double-digit revenue expansion continues to justify the premium.
While specific sector benchmarks and historical P/E ranges were not provided for direct comparison, the combination of strong fundamentals and a potentially stretched valuation creates a nuanced risk-reward profile. Investors must weigh the safety offered by high margins and low distress probabilities against the possibility that current prices already reflect optimistic growth scenarios. The data suggests a scenario where downside protection is structurally sound due to quality metrics, yet upside potential may be limited if earnings fail to accelerate commensurately with the 40x multiple.
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 → | 12.5% | 14.5% | 16.5% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $65 | $54 | $46 |
| 3% | $70 | $57 | $48 |
| 4% | $77 | $61 | $51 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $166.78.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=14.5%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $57 (+0.0%). 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 XSD or MDYG, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell RMBS shares regardless of RMBS's individual fundamentals. We estimate $1.1B of passive capital is structurally linked to RMBS through 8 tracked ETFs. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption cycles can create noticeable volume spikes unrelated to company news.
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 RMBS to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If RMBS (RMBS) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies MAXLINEAR INC (MXL) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 1 ETFs with RMBS. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 15 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
RMBS Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 12 RMBS shares, reducing daily market volatility.
RMBS (RMBS) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 2.4% of the XSD (XSD) and 0.9% of the MDYG (MDYG). Across 13 tracked ETFs, approximately 9M shares (8.5% 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 RMBS Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 13 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
RMBS 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 RMBS over the past year sits near $96.09 (17% of 252-day volume). The current price of $166.78 trades 73.6% 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 (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.
RMBS Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does RMBS convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
RMBS converts 102% 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 1.4% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-14 | 18,858 | $134.85 | $2.5M |
| 2026-05-13 | 207 | $130.28 | $26,967.96 |
| 2026-05-12 | 61,298 | $134.51 | $8.2M |
| 2026-05-04 | 4 | $111.93 | $447.72 |
| 2026-05-01 | 299 | $115.11 | $34,417.89 |
| 2026-04-30 | 1,162 | $112.16 | $130,329.92 |
| 2026-04-29 | 117,137 | $111.27 | $13.0M |
| 2026-04-28 | 2,296 | $141.31 | $324,447.76 |
| 2026-04-24 | 10,764 | $138.50 | $1.5M |
| 2026-04-21 | 1,274 | $126.87 | $161,632.38 |
| 2026-04-20 | 403 | $126.93 | $51,152.79 |
| 2026-04-13 | 1,043 | $110.44 | $115,188.92 |
| 2026-04-09 | 239 | $101.43 | $24,241.77 |
| 2026-04-02 | 90 | $89.95 | $8,095.5 |
| 2026-03-27 | 10 | $91.44 | $914.4 |
| 2026-03-24 | 453 | $93.35 | $42,287.55 |
| 2026-03-18 | 518 | $93.50 | $48,433 |
| 2026-03-17 | 30,604 | $92.78 | $2.8M |
| 2026-03-16 | 469 | $94.01 | $44,090.69 |
| 2026-03-10 | 1,062 | $88.52 | $94,008.24 |
| 2026-03-09 | 2,461 | $88.12 | $216,863.32 |
| 2026-02-27 | 8,292 | $102.17 | $847,193.64 |
| 2026-02-17 | 3,237 | $101.95 | $330,012.15 |
| 2026-02-09 | 3,709 | $107.10 | $397,233.9 |
| 2026-01-30 | 339 | $121.60 | $41,222.4 |
| 2026-01-29 | 9,145 | $124.44 | $1.1M |
| 2026-01-27 | 5 | $114.19 | $570.95 |
| 2026-01-26 | 55,729 | $115.31 | $6.4M |
| 2026-01-23 | 9,729 | $124.77 | $1.2M |
| 2026-01-21 | 183,452 | $110.10 | $20.2M |
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 RMBS 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.