Ulta Beauty, Inc. (ULTA)
Quantitative Summary
DeterministicAt 19.8x earnings — a 43% discount to the sector average of 35.0x — ULTA is in the lower valuation range. Financial health is average: Piotroski 6/9, Altman Z 6.3. DCF fair value of $235 implies 55% downside based on model assumptions. Beneish M-Score of -1.16 exceeds the -2.22 academic threshold — earnings quality may warrant further review.
Generated deterministically from quant metrics and financial statements. Not a recommendation.
Algorithmic Teardown
AI-GeneratedThe capital allocation efficiency of Ulta Beauty demonstrates exceptional quality, with a Return on Invested Capital significantly outpacing the cost of capital by nearly 20 percentage points. This robust spread is underpinned by an ROE exceeding 48%, driven primarily by high asset turnover rather than leverage or margin expansion alone, as indicated by the DuPont decomposition where revenue generation accounts for the majority of returns. Financial integrity metrics further support this structural strength; a Beneish M-Score well below -2 suggests minimal earnings manipulation risk, while an Altman Z-Score above 8 confirms a low probability of distress despite a modest Piotroski F-Score reflecting recent operational stagnation rather than fundamental deterioration.
Valuation analysis reveals a significant divergence between current market pricing and intrinsic value models derived from cash flow projections. While the stock trades at approximately half its calculated fair value, implying substantial downside potential relative to DCF assumptions that assume an 8.6% long-term free cash flow growth rate, this discount exists within a context where revenue expansion has effectively stalled with single-digit year-over-year increases. The market multiple remains deeply compressed compared to the broader consumer cyclical sector average, suggesting investors are pricing in persistent headwinds or limited scalability despite the company's historically high profitability factors and neutral value exposure.
Risk-adjusted performance metrics present an intriguing anomaly where Fama-French alpha indicates strong abnormal returns over the annual period, yet this does not necessarily validate future momentum given the lack of insider trading activity and flat revenue trajectory. The combination of robust profitability characteristics against a backdrop of zero growth creates a complex risk-reward profile where historical factor loading may diverge from forward-looking expectations based on current operational data.
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 → | 8.2% | 10.2% | 12.2% |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2% | $287 | $211 | $165 |
| 3% | $333 | $235 | $179 |
| 4% | $402 | $266 | $196 |
Center = base case. Green = >10% upside, Red = >10% downside vs $494.87.
Pre-computed DCF: WACC=10.2%, terminal growth 3%. Fair value $235 (-55.4%). Not investment advice.
Valuation Context
Currently trading 17% above its 5-year average P/E of 17.4x.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current price of ULTA is below its 50-day moving average but above the 200-day moving average, suggesting a potential consolidation phase within an overall upward trend. With an RSI value of 42.1, the security appears to be in a relatively neutral state, neither overbought nor oversold, indicating that it may continue its current trajectory without significant momentum shifts.
Quant Health Deep Dive
Profitability & Value Creation
DuPont Analysis — ROE Decomposition
Breaking down Return on Equity to see how the company generates its ROE — efficiency, margins, or leverage.
Balance Sheet Health
Earnings Surprise History
EPS estimates vs actuals for the most recent reported quarters. Source: yfinance.
Dividend History
| Date | Amount | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2012-03-16 | $1.0000 | — |
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.
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 XRT or VOT, the fund manager is mechanically forced to buy or sell ULTA shares regardless of Ulta Beauty, Inc.'s individual fundamentals. We estimate $3.3B of passive capital is structurally linked to ULTA 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 Ulta Beauty, Inc. to visualize passive redemption contagion across ETFs and collateral stocks.
If Ulta Beauty, Inc. (ULTA) experiences a significant drawdown, ETF redemptions can create collateral selling pressure on co-held stocks. Our model identifies AMAZON.COM INC (AMZN) as the most exposed collateral stock, sharing 2 ETFs with ULTA. This is the "Passive Contagion" effect described in the Inelastic Market Hypothesis.
Contagion model based on shared ETF exposure and constituent weights across 31 tracked ETFs. Estimated selling pressure is a simplified model — actual impact depends on market liquidity, ETF redemption mechanics, and market-maker activity.
ULTA Ownership Dynamics
Passive funds hold 1 in every 7 ULTA shares, reducing daily market volatility.
Ulta Beauty, Inc. (ULTA) exerts measurable gravity on the passive index market, currently representing 1.1% of the XRT (XRT) and 0.6% of the VOT (VOT). Across 31 tracked ETFs, approximately 7M shares (14.9% of float) are held by passive funds and rarely trade on the open market. This level of passive ownership means index rebalances can create outsized volume events.
ETFs with Highest ULTA Exposure
Float lock-up computed from 31 ETFs tracked by SecuritiesDB. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds, etc.).
ULTA 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 Ulta Beauty, Inc. over the past year sits near $524.32 (19% of 252-day volume). The current price of $494.87 sits 5.6% below the POC — suggesting potential mean-reversion upside if institutional demand reasserts at this level. The highly concentrated volume profile (19% 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.
ULTA Capital Efficiency
How efficiently does Ulta Beauty, Inc. convert operating profits into free cash? The FCF Conversion ratio measures the gap between accounting earnings and real cash generation.
Ulta Beauty, Inc. converts 58% of its EBITDA into free cash flow, a healthy conversion rate indicating efficient capital management — the business generates substantial cash after reinvestment. The positive ROIC-WACC spread of 15.4% 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-05-12 | 7 | $511.98 | $3,583.86 |
| 2026-05-04 | 1,364 | $531.95 | $725,579.8 |
| 2026-04-20 | 700 | $553.36 | $387,352 |
| 2026-04-16 | 13 | $539.14 | $7,008.82 |
| 2026-04-15 | 49 | $533.09 | $26,121.41 |
| 2026-04-14 | 130 | $526.76 | $68,478.8 |
| 2026-04-10 | 5,204 | $532.79 | $2.8M |
| 2026-04-07 | 309 | $542.65 | $167,678.85 |
| 2026-03-31 | 12 | $510.09 | $6,121.08 |
| 2026-03-27 | 15 | $521.64 | $7,824.6 |
| 2026-03-26 | 38 | $526.14 | $19,993.32 |
| 2026-03-25 | 27 | $515.22 | $13,910.94 |
| 2026-03-23 | 100 | $529.97 | $52,997 |
| 2026-02-26 | 56 | $684.27 | $38,319.12 |
| 2026-02-17 | 59 | $683.40 | $40,320.6 |
| 2026-02-12 | 3 | $683.05 | $2,049.15 |
| 2026-02-11 | 3,062 | $679.28 | $2.1M |
| 2026-02-03 | 35 | $665.57 | $23,294.95 |
| 2026-01-27 | 2 | $661.34 | $1,322.68 |
| 2026-01-26 | 37 | $686.12 | $25,386.44 |
| 2026-01-20 | 1,721 | $663.48 | $1.1M |
| 2026-01-15 | 218 | $663.85 | $144,719.3 |
| 2026-01-14 | 3,599 | $664.85 | $2.4M |
| 2026-01-12 | 200 | $666.18 | $133,236 |
| 2026-01-09 | 69 | $657.46 | $45,364.74 |
| 2026-01-08 | 1,508 | $655.36 | $988,282.88 |
| 2026-01-06 | 251 | $631.15 | $158,418.65 |
| 2025-12-29 | 455 | $607.52 | $276,421.6 |
| 2025-12-22 | 1,661 | $597.88 | $993,078.68 |
| 2025-12-10 | 12 | $602.97 | $7,235.64 |
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 | |
| ROST | 0.337 | 0.285 | Moderate |
| TJX | 0.331 | 0.328 | Moderate |
| ADBE | 0.315 | 0.389 | Moderate |
| SWK | 0.303 | 0.321 | Moderate |
| NDSN | 0.301 | 0.234 | Moderate |
| DLTR | 0.291 | 0.280 | Low correlation |
| HST | 0.284 | 0.220 | Low correlation |
| WSM | 0.284 | 0.244 | Low correlation |
| WTFC | 0.282 | 0.250 | Low correlation |
Pearson correlation of daily log returns. 252d ≈ 1 trading year. Computed from price history. Not investment advice.
Compare ULTA 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.