TPBTurning Point Brands, Inc.
Is it safe?
One accounting flag to check: an accounting pattern worth a look (common in fast growers) and big price swings.
Several accounting flags in the manipulation-likely range Beneish M-score, a forensic model that detects earnings-manipulation patterns (receivables outrunning sales, margins slipping, accrual-heavy profit).
Mixed fundamental signals Piotroski F-score, nine pass/fail tests of year-over-year financial health across profitability, balance sheet and efficiency. 7 to 9 is strong, 0 to 3 weak.
Investment-grade balance sheet. A rule of thumb on leverage, not a credit rating.
Large price swings, high volatility. Worst drawdown -73% · now 60% below its 52-week high.
Unless marked, from SEC EDGAR, as of Dec 31, 2025.
Against the whole market›
Percentile against every name Ryufin tracks. Higher is better; the tick marks the middle of the market. Context, not one of the checks above.
Where this answer is blind. Altman sits structurally low for utilities and pipelines; Beneish runs high for fast growers, since sales growth alone lifts it; banks and REITs are excluded.
Can TPB take a bad year?
Turning Point Brands, Inc. carries $26M of net debt at 0.34× EBITDA: a load its earnings can carry.
Net debt · as at Q2 2026 · under two and a half years of EBITDA, comfortable
- Net debt / EBITDA
- 0.34×
Net debt / EBITDA
- Interest cover
- 2.67×
Interest cover · operating profit covers the interest bill, with room to spare
- Annualised volatility
- 49%
Annualised volatility · roughly twice as jumpy as the market
Details›
- Total debtQ2 2026
- $294M
- Cash and short-term investments
- $268M
- Net debt
- $26M
- EBITDA, trailing twelve months
- $76M
- Operating profit, trailing twelve months
- $75M
- Debt / equity
- 0.65×
- Total debt / EBITDA
- 3.86×
- Annualised volatilitytwo years of daily moves
- 49%
- Worst drawdown on file
- −73%
- Below its 52-week high
- 60%
Balance sheet from SEC filings; drawdown and volatility from end-of-day closes; Altman Z from the filed statements.