MODEL VERDICT
StubHub Holdings, Inc. (STUB) — Relative Valuation
Peer multiples, Monte Carlo simulation & quality-adjusted fair value
Popular:
Peer multiples, Monte Carlo simulation & quality-adjusted fair value
Composite score derived from valuation, quality, and risk factors
Quantitative model thresholds · For educational and research purposes only
Each row records the model's monthly assessment. High Conviction = the model detected notable undervaluation vs peers. Neutral = no notable divergence was found. The return column shows the actual price change over 90 days for reference. This is a quantitative observation log — not investment advice.
| Date | Assessment | Score | Price | Status | 90d Fwd Return |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2026 | MODERATE | 0.62 | $9.57 | CURRENT | — |
| Feb 21, 2026 | MODERATE | 0.62 | $9.36 | CURRENT | — |
| Feb 14, 2026 | MODERATE | 0.62 | $9.23 | CURRENT | — |
| Feb 11, 2026 | MODERATE | 0.62 | $10.42 | CURRENT | — |
| Jan 11, 2026 | MODERATE | 0.70 | $12.77 | Pending | -20.8% |
Historical model observations for research purposes only. Past quantitative patterns do not predict future results. Not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security.
| Methodology | Fair Value | vs Current | Weight | Quality | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forward P/E 113 analyst estimates | $23.16 | +142.0% | 20% | A- | Analyst Est. |
| Price / Free Cash Flow 105 industry peers | $15.32 | +60.1% | 15% | B+ | Peer Data |
| EV/EBIT 77 industry peers | $6.50 | -32.1% | 8% | B+ | Peer Data |
| EV/FCF 107 industry peers | $10.47 | +9.4% | 7% | B | Model Driven |
| EV To Revenue 124 industry peers | $15.44 | +61.3% | 4% | B | Data |
| Price / Sales 125 industry peers | $18.85 | +97.0% | 3% | B | Model Driven |
| FCF Yield 107 industry peers | $15.43 | +61.2% | 1% | B | Data |
| Weighted Output Blended model output | $18.11 | +89.2% | 100% | 59 | SIGNIFICANTLY UNDERVALUED |
Cross-sectional regression predicting expected multiples based on growth, margins, ROIC, and beta.
Based on our peer multiples analysis with 15 valuation metrics, the model estimates STUB's fair value at $18.11 vs the current price of $9.57, implying +89.2% upside potential. Model verdict: Significantly Undervalued. Confidence: 59/100. This is a quantitative estimate, not a recommendation.
The blended fair value of $18.11 is calculated using four lenses: industry median multiples (40%), historical multiples (30%), forward estimates (20%), and quality-adjusted multiples (10%). Monte Carlo simulation (10,000 iterations) gives a range of $11.98 (P10) to $21.12 (P90), with a median of $16.50.
STUB's current P/E of -63.8x compares to the industry median of 26.2x (71 peers in the group). This represents a -343.7% discount to the industry. The historical average P/E is N/Ax over 0 years. Signal: Deep Discount.
8 analysts cover STUB with a consensus rating of Buy. The consensus price target is $23.56 (range: $9.00 — $45.00), implying +146.2% upside from the current price. Grade breakdown: Strong Buy (0), Buy (4), Hold (4), Sell (0), Strong Sell (0).
The model confidence score is 59/100, based on: data completeness (21), peer quality (25), historical depth (5), earnings stability (5), and model agreement (3). Cyclicality penalty: -0 points. The model shows moderate agreement across inputs.
The model flags several key risks: (1) Macro/regulatory risks are not captured in this model but remain material.
Peak earnings risk data is not available for STUB.
No. This dashboard is a quantitative research tool for educational and informational purposes only. It is not investment advice, a solicitation, or a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. The operator of this platform is not a registered investment advisor (RIA), broker-dealer, or financial planner. All model outputs, fair value estimates, signals, and scenarios are the result of automated quantitative computations and should not be construed as professional financial guidance. You should consult a qualified, licensed financial advisor before making any investment decisions. Past model performance is not indicative of future results.