Skip to main content
Homepage
Full 18-step deep-dive · ~20–30 min · a member feature.
FRESH Analysis Report
Aug 13, 2026
today · 100% complete
For AI assistants & researchers — machine-readable summary of this page

What this page is: Delvantic's full research page for Oddity Tech Ltd. (ODD) — AI-driven forensic equity research: mechanical valuation models (DCF, EPV, anchored-PE, scenario) plus three independent AI lenses (Quality / Value / Sentiment). Everything below is rendered server-side; you are not missing content that requires JavaScript. All scores are predictions and research opinions, not financial advice.

Our current read (analysis of 2026-08-13): Designation Gem · Cairn score +44 (−100…+100 Quality+Value blend) · Quality 57 · Value 34 · Sentiment -53 (timing only, not weighted) · Composite fair value $37.41 vs $12.90 at analysis

Page map (sections in order; each card carries a stable reference-name attribute you can cite):

  • profile-header / price-overview — company profile, live quote, market cap
  • extended-analysisthe core: three AI lens reads with findings, scores, and the analyst memo
  • future-predictions — our forward price-band predictions
  • market-narrative / ai-findings / gpt-critique — narrative context, cross-model findings, and an adversarial critique of our own analysis (near the end of the document)
  • Members-only sections (render as login gates for anonymous readers): price-history, income-trend, key-metrics, financials (statement tables), insider-trading. The analysis above is public; the raw data tables require a free account.

More for machine readers: site briefing at /llms.txt · any ticker resolves at delvantic.com/stock/TICKER · raw inputs are public-company filings and market data (via licensed data feeds); every model, score, lens read, and prediction on this page is Delvantic's own analysis.

Oddity Tech Ltd.

ODD NASDAQ
Consumer Defensive · Household & Personal Products
Tel Aviv, 6761304, Israel oddity.com Updated Aug 12, 11:17am
Price
$12.43
Market Cap
$575.6M
Employees
489
Beta
2.38
Avg Volume
859,992
CEO
Mr. Oran Holtzman

Oddity Tech Ltd. operates as a consumer tech company specializing in digital-first brands for the beauty and wellness industries worldwide. It leverages an AI-driven online platform powered by data science, machine learning, and computer vision to analyze consumer needs and deliver personalized beauty, wellness, and technology products. The company offers a diverse portfolio under the IL MAKIAGE and SpoiledChild brands, encompassing face and complexion products, eye, brow and lip makeup, tools, skincare, haircare, and supplements. Additionally, through ODDITY LABS, a biotechnology center, it employs AI-based molecule discovery technology to develop novel ingredients that enhance performance and outcomes in beauty and wellness solutions. Oddity Tech Ltd. serves consumers directly via its innovative e-commerce platform, focusing on precision-driven product recommendations and development in the competitive personal care market. Incorporated in 2013 and headquartered in Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel, it plays a key role in transforming how beauty and wellness products are discovered and purchased digitally.

Runs with full report Generated: Aug 2, 2026 1:33pm
Earnings Schedule
Checked daily · calendar updated Aug 13
No upcoming print on the calendar yet — companies typically confirm a few weeks ahead. Last print was Jun 2, 2026.
EPS surprise history — vs analyst consensus · 4 prints of vendor history
+0.3%
Feb '26
+42.9%
Feb '26
-2.4%
Apr '26
-240.0%
Jun '26
Print date EPS est. EPS actual Revenue est. Revenue actual
Jun 2, 2026 $-0.05 $-0.17 -240.0%
Apr 1, 2026 $0.84 $0.82 -2.4%
Feb 25, 2026 $0.14 $0.20 +42.9%
Feb 3, 2026 $3.32 $3.33 +0.3%

Green = beat the estimate, red = missed. An earnings print is the fastest way a thesis changes — our designations should be re-read after each one.

Recent SEC Filings
Filed Form Document
Aug 5, 2026 4 View
Aug 5, 2026 144 View
Aug 4, 2026 4 View
Jul 30, 2026 6-K View
Jul 29, 2026 4 View
Jul 29, 2026 4 View
Jul 29, 2026 4 View
Jul 29, 2026 SCHEDULE 13G View
Jul 20, 2026 4 View
Jul 2, 2026 SCHEDULE 13G/A View
Jul 1, 2026 4 View
Jul 1, 2026 144 View

Filings link to the SEC’s EDGAR system. Annual/quarterly reports (10-K, 10-Q, 20-F) carry the full story; 8-K/6-K current reports are the fastest signal that something material happened.

Price Overview
Price at report time
$12.90
as of Aug 13, 1:01am (14h ago)
Change · Aug 13
+0.42 (+3.37%)
Day Range
$12.27 – $13.07
52-Week Range
$9.25 – $64.23
50-Day MA
$14.18
200-Day MA
$24.06
Volume
821,335.00
Right now · live
loading…
 
Real-time — the change above is the move since the report (over 14h).
Share Structure
Outstanding 56,656,685.00
Float 30,065,394.00
Free Float 53.1%
Normal free float — 53.1% of shares trade freely, ~46.9% held by insiders/institutions
Healthy float typical of established companies. Good liquidity for entering and exiting positions without major price impact.
Price History (1 Year)
Last updated: Aug 13, 2026 1:01am (14h ago)
Revenue & Net Income Trend
The directional story — useful even when net income is negative.
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 8:34pm (10d ago)
Why there are no quarterly figures for Oddity Tech Ltd.

This company does not file structured financial statements with the U.S. SEC, so quarterly figures aren't available from our filings-based data engine. Annual figures shown here come from the sources that do cover it.

Revenue
The top line — total sales before any costs or taxes are subtracted. A measure of how much business the company is doing.
Net Income
The bottom line — profit left after subtracting all expenses, interest, and taxes from revenue. Reflects accounting profitability, but includes non-cash items like depreciation, so it isn't the same as cash earned.
Operating Cash Flow
The real cash generated by the day-to-day business — selling products, paying suppliers, collecting from customers. Calculated from net income by adding back non-cash items and adjusting for timing (unpaid bills, unsold inventory). When OCF consistently lags net income, the reported profit may not be converting to real money.
Period Revenue Net Income Net Margin YoY/QoQ
Key Metrics
TD Twelve Data statement HEX SEC filing
P/E Ratio (Price per dollar of earnings)
HEX
Stock Price / EPS (Diluted)
7.17
Stock Price: $12.43
EPS (Diluted): 1.80
P/B Ratio (Price vs net asset value)
HEX
Stock Price / Book Value Per Share
2.00
Stock Price: $12.43
Total Equity: $396.50M
Shares: 61,525,000
EV/EBITDA (Total value vs operating profit)
HEX
Enterprise Value / EBITDA
2.55
Market Cap: $575.63M
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $402.21M
EBITDA: $129.46M
Enterprise Value (Takeover price (cap + debt - cash))
HEX
Market Cap + Total Debt - Cash
$330.4M
Market Cap: $575.63M
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $402.21M
Gross Margin (Revenue left after direct costs)
HEX
Gross Profit / Revenue
72.7%
Gross Profit: $588.71M
Revenue: $809.84M
Operating Margin (Revenue left after all operations)
HEX
Operating Income / Revenue
14.7%
Operating Income: $118.77M
Revenue: $809.84M
Net Margin (Revenue left as actual profit)
HEX
Net Income / Revenue
13.7%
Net Income: $110.75M
Revenue: $809.84M
ROE (Profit from shareholder equity)
HEX
Net Income / Total Equity
27.9%
Net Income: $110.75M
Total Equity: $396.50M
ROIC (Profit from all invested capital)
HEX
NOPAT / Invested Capital
-1,696.3%
Operating Income: $118.77M
Tax Rate: 18.4%
Equity: $396.50M
Total Debt: $0.00
Cash: $402.21M
Zero debt — invested capital = equity minus cash (very efficient)
Current Ratio (Can it pay short-term bills)
HEX
Current Assets / Current Liabilities
5.24
Current Assets: $601.80M
Current Liabilities: $114.83M
Debt/Equity (Leverage — debt vs equity)
HEX
Total Debt / Total Equity
0.00
Short-Term Debt: $0.00
Long-Term Debt: $0.00
Total Debt: $0.00
Total Equity: $396.50M
Zero debt — this company carries no debt obligations. Strongest possible score.
Rev/Share (Top-line per share)
HEX
Revenue / Shares Outstanding
$13.16
Revenue: $809.84M
Shares: 61,525,000
Book Value/Share (Net assets per share)
HEX
(Total Assets - Total Liabilities) / Shares
$6.44
Total Equity: $396.50M
Shares: 61,525,000
FCF/Share (Real cash generated per share)
HEX
(Operating Cash Flow + CapEx) / Shares
$1.36
Operating CF: $87.58M
CapEx: -$3.94M
Shares: 61,525,000
CapEx is negative (outflow) — added to OCF to get FCF
Div Yield (Annual income from holding)
TD
Last Annual Dividend / Stock Price
Last Dividend: $0.00
Stock Price: $12.43
Payout Ratio (Earnings paid out as dividends)
HEX
Dividends Paid / Net Income
Dividends Paid: N/A
Net Income: $110.75M
Dividends paid not available in cash flow statement
Industry Benchmarks
Last run: Aug 13, 2026 12:18am
Compares ODD against LLM-researched typical ranges for its industry. One research call per industry, cached indefinitely — every stock in the same industry reuses the same baseline.
Income Statement (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 8:34pm (10d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue $222.6M $324.5M $508.7M $647.0M $809.8M
Cost of Revenue $69.4M $106.5M $150.5M $178.7M $221.1M
Gross Profit $153.2M $218.1M $358.2M $468.3M $588.7M
Operating Expenses $133.7M $190.4M $283.9M $352.7M $469.9M
Operating Income $19.5M $27.7M $74.3M $115.6M $118.8M
Net Income $13.9M $21.7M $58.5M $101.5M $110.7M
EBITDA $23.5M $32.1M $82.9M $125.4M $129.5M
EPS $0.26 $0.41 $1.06 $1.77 $1.95
EPS (Diluted) $0.26 $0.39 $1.00 $1.64 $1.80
Balance Sheet (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 8:34pm (10d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Cash & Equivalents $28.8M $41.0M $36.5M $50.3M $402.2M
Total Current Assets $145.9M $223.8M $223.4M $601.8M
Total Assets $216.4M $404.9M $438.9M $1.1B
Current Liabilities $90.4M $109.3M $124.8M $114.8M
Long-Term Debt
Total Liabilities $105.4M $121.8M $156.6M $741.3M
Total Equity $68.6M $111.0M $283.1M $282.3M $396.5M
Retained Earnings $43.2M $101.8M $203.3M $314.0M
Cash Flow (Annual)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 8:34pm (10d ago)
Metric 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Operating Cash Flow $10.2M $39.0M $87.5M $137.8M $87.6M
Capital Expenditure -$2.4M -$2.3M -$2.1M -$3.3M -$3.9M
Free Cash Flow $7.9M $36.7M $85.4M $134.5M $83.6M
Acquisitions (net) -$11.8M -$23.2M
Net Debt Issued / (Repaid) $-318,000 $-362,000 -$4.3M
Dividends Paid
Stock Buybacks -$147.3M
Net Change in Cash -$9.2M $12.2M -$4.3M $11.6M $351.9M
Growth Trends (YoY %)
Last updated: Aug 2, 2026 8:34pm (10d ago)
Metric 2022 2023 2024 2025
Revenue Growth +45.8% +56.7% +27.2% +25.2%
Gross Profit Growth +42.3% +64.3% +30.7% +25.7%
Operating Income Growth +41.8% +168.6% +55.5% +2.7%
Net Income Growth +56.1% +169.4% +73.4% +9.1%
EBITDA Growth +36.4% +158.5% +51.3% +3.2%
Insider Trading (Recent)
Last updated: Aug 13, 2026 12:22am (14h ago)
Type codes PPurchase SSale AAward / grant MOption exercise FIn-kind (tax) CConversion GGift DReturn to issuer
All SEC Form 4 codes
Open market
P Purchase
Open-market or private purchase of shares.
S Sale
Open-market or private sale of shares.
Compensation (Rule 16b-3)
A Award / grant
Grant or award of securities (RSUs, options, etc.) under Rule 16b-3.
D Return to issuer
Securities disposed back to the company under Rule 16b-3.
F In-kind (tax)
Shares withheld or delivered to pay the option-exercise price or tax — not an open-market sale.
I Discretionary
Discretionary transaction under an employee plan — Rule 16b-3(f).
M Option exercise
Exercise or conversion of a derivative (option/RSU) into shares — exempt.
Derivatives
C Conversion
Conversion of a derivative security into the underlying shares.
E Short expiration
Expiration of a short derivative position.
H Long expiration
Expiration or cancellation of a long derivative position with value received.
O OTM exercise
Exercise of an out-of-the-money derivative.
X ITM exercise
Exercise of an in-the-money or at-the-money derivative.
Other exempt
G Gift
Bona fide gift of securities.
L Small acquisition
Small acquisition under Rule 16a-6.
W Inheritance
Acquisition or disposition by will or the laws of descent.
Z Voting trust
Deposit into or withdrawal from a voting trust.
Other
J Other
Other acquisition or disposition (explained in a Form 4 footnote).
K Equity swap
Transaction in an equity swap or similar instrument.
U Tender / buyout
Disposition via tender of shares in a change-of-control transaction.

Compensation-plan codes (A, D, F, M) are routine and rarely directional. Open-market P (buy) and S (sale) carry the most signal.

Date Insider Type Shares Price Value
2026-08-05 Drucker Mann Lindsay S-Sale 11,473.00 $15.10 $173,242
2026-07-31 Drucker Mann Lindsay M-OptionExercise 23,929.00 $0.00 $0
2026-07-29 Payorski Lilach A-Award 10,889.00 $0.00 $0
2026-07-29 Cheresniya Ohad A-Award 10,889.00 $0.00 $0
2026-07-29 Nir Yehoshua A-Award 10,889.00 $0.00 $0
2026-07-28 Payorski Lilach M-OptionExercise 4,596.00 $0.00 $0
2026-07-28 Cheresniya Ohad M-OptionExercise 4,596.00 $0.00 $0
2026-07-28 Nir Yehoshua M-OptionExercise 4,596.00 $0.00 $0
2026-07-19 Cheresniya Ohad M-OptionExercise 2,956.00 $0.00 $0
Deep Analysis
Last run: Aug 13, 2026 12:30:41 am

Pre-flight intelligence scans the company first, then routes to the right analytical methods.

0 Company Classification — What type of company is this?
1 Industry Landscape — Where is the industry headed?
2 Company Momentum — Where is this company trending?
3 Forward Projection — 1Y & 2Y projected metrics (requires Layer 1 + 2)
4a DCF Valuation — Present value of future cash flows
4b Earnings Power Value — Floor value — worth with zero growth
4c Anchored PE — Industry PE adjusted for growth differential
4d Reverse DCF — What growth is the market pricing in?
4e Revenue-Based DCF — For growth/narrative companies (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4f Anchored P/S — Price-to-Sales peer comparison (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4g Scenario Analysis — Bull / Base / Bear (skip if mature earner)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4h Dividend Discount Model — For dividend/income stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4i Book Value Analysis — For deep value / turnaround stocks only
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
4j Insider Activity — Are insiders buying or selling?
4f Cash Flow Quality — How trustworthy is the FCF?
4g Debt Maturity Risk — Can it handle its debt?
4h Macro Environment — Rates, market valuation, volatility
4i Sector Intelligence — How does this company compare within its sector?
4j Revenue Confidence — How reliable is the growth projection?
4k Sensitivity Analysis — How fragile is the fair value estimate?
4l Sector Demand Cycle — Is the sector in a boom, steady state, or contraction?
5 AI Investigation — Adaptive research engine (Claude)
5b Thesis Evaluation — What does the market believe? (narrative/platform stocks only)
Not applicable for Mature Earner companies
6 Valuation Synthesis — Weighted verdict from all methods (requires Layer 4)
Narrative Economics
The story the market is telling about this stock — the intangible X-factor (founder mythology, cult dynamics, TAM-of-imagination) that moves price beyond what cash flows alone explain. After Shiller, Narrative Economics.
No narrative profile yet for ODD — it's generated by the pipeline (market-narrative step).
AI Lens 4th lens · how AI reaches this business · 5-yr
2026-08-13
The creme is there an opportunity here? Caution
Oddity's product economics are durable but its advertised AI edge is the single most commoditizable asset it owns — the opportunity only exists if ODDITY LABS turns intelligence into patented molecules rather than better ad targeting.
Position 47 with a 24-75 range: the physical, repeat-purchase revenue unit scores 78 while intelligence commoditization (33) and entrant compression (27) attack the differentiator the equity story is built on, and agentic discovery (36) threatens a business whose only distribution is bought attention. Watch marketing spend as a percentage of revenue against operating margin — the 17.9%→14.7% step down in 2025 is the first observable that the funnel advantage is being arbitraged. The re-rate trigger is narrow and specific: a shipped SKU containing a LABS-derived proprietary active with patent coverage and gross margin pushing past 75%.
47
AI Position
Mixed - the product survives, the tech premium may not
Cheap machine intelligence commoditizes exactly what Oddity claims as its edge — computer-vision matching, quiz personalization, and creative/media optimization — while leaving intact only the ordinary but real assets of a high-gross-margin repeat-purchase beauty brand plus optional molecule IP from ODDITY LABS.
Exposure 73 Confidence 58 50 = neutral
Primary Tailwind

AI collapses the cost of the content, creative, translation, and customer-service layers that a global online-only beauty operation consumes heavily, and ODDITY LABS' AI-guided discovery of bio-identical actives could convert a software story into patentable physical IP that no model can copy.

Primary Pressure

Oddity's differentiator is an information-processing layer — shade/skin matching, personalization, funnel optimization — and that layer is precisely what falling model costs hand to every DTC challenger and every legacy brand's agency, compressing the tech premium into an ordinary paid-media arbitrage that Meta and TikTok reprice in the auction.

Critical Hinge

Whether repeat-cohort economics hold once the matching engine is table stakes: watch marketing spend as a share of revenue against repeat-customer revenue share and operating margin (already 17.9%→14.7% in 2025).

Hard to Reproduce

Physical formulation and supply chain, a large installed base of paying repeat buyers with first-party shade/skin/repurchase histories, and any patented molecules out of ODDITY LABS — none of which are reproducible by prompting a model.

Forensic fingerprint same 11 factors for every stock · 0 unfavorable · 50 neutral · 100 favorable
Underlying Need Persistence do people still need this at all? 88
Demand for cosmetics, skincare and haircare is durable and non-informational.
People will keep buying pigment, cleansers and supplements regardless of intelligence cost; AI changes how the purchase is discovered and matched, not whether the product is consumed.
Category volume growth in makeup/skincare · Repeat purchase frequency per cohort · Supplement/wellness attach rates
relevance 70 · confidence 86
Solution Persistence will they still solve it this way? 62
Buying beauty online sight-unseen persists, but not necessarily through Oddity's funnel.
Better AI matching increases confidence in unseen purchase — that helps the channel broadly, including Amazon, Sephora's app and AI-native rivals, so the mode survives while Oddity's specific claim on it weakens.
Return rates on shade-matched orders · New customer growth vs repeat mix · Share of orders from owned app
relevance 78 · confidence 55
Intelligence Commoditization does cheap AI power them or copy them? 33
Cheap models copy Oddity's stated moat more than they power it.
Vision-based shade matching, questionnaire personalization and creative generation are now near-commodity capabilities; the same cost curve that lowers Oddity's content spend hands rivals an adequate equivalent stack.
Competitors launching vision matching tools · Cost per creative asset disclosed · Conversion rate trend vs prior years
relevance 92 · confidence 62
Responsibility Transfer are they paid to take the blame? 40
Consumers pay for a product, not for someone to absorb liability.
There is no compliance vertical the customer wants to outsource here; regulatory burden on cosmetics/supplements exists but is not what customers are paying Oddity to carry.
Supplement labeling/claims scrutiny · Adverse-event or recall incidents · Ingredient regulation in EU/US
relevance 18 · confidence 70
Scarcity Migration do their assets get rarer or more common? 48
Algorithmic edge becomes abundant; molecules and brand affinity stay scarce.
The scarce assets migrating upward in value are patentable actives, manufacturing, and a loyal repeat base — Oddity owns some of each, but its most-advertised asset (data science) is the one becoming common.
LABS patents filed or granted · Proprietary ingredient in shipped SKU · Brand-search volume trend
relevance 85 · confidence 52
Customer DIY Preference will customers just build it themselves? 84
Consumers cannot self-manufacture cosmetics; DIY is not the threat vector.
The internalization risk that hits B2B software is absent — the risk is substitution to another vendor, not insourcing.
Private-label/indie brand proliferation · Refill or DIY-kit category growth
relevance 22 · confidence 80
AI Intermediation Position do AI agents go through them or around them? 36
Agentic shopping likely routes around a paid-social-dependent DTC brand.
Oddity's acquisition depends on interrupting feeds; assistants that rank by ingredient efficacy, reviews and price favor scaled or clinically differentiated brands, and Oddity has no retail shelf as a fallback surface.
Traffic share from AI assistants · Presence in agentic checkout programs · Blended CAC vs prior-year trend
relevance 80 · confidence 45
Data Leverage does their data make AI better? 58
Large first-party matching dataset is real but of contested exclusivity.
Tens of millions of self-reported skin/shade profiles plus repurchase outcomes genuinely sharpen recommendation and SKU development, yet foundation models plus competitor-scale data narrow the gap and none of it is regulated or exclusive.
Disclosed user/profile counts · Match accuracy or return-rate metrics · New SKU hit rate from data
relevance 72 · confidence 50
AI Margin Conversion do the AI savings become profit? 50
Content and service savings are real but leak into ad auctions.
Gross margin is already 72.7% so the leverage must come from marketing and support opex — and platform ad pricing tends to absorb efficiency gains, as the 2025 operating margin decline to 14.7% hints.
Marketing as % of revenue · Support headcount per order · Operating margin recovery above 18%
relevance 80 · confidence 48
Revenue Unit Durability does the thing they charge for survive? 78
The monetized unit is a shipped physical good — no seats, no tokens to deflate.
Revenue is per-order product revenue, immune to per-seat or per-task deflation; the risk is volume and CAC, not repricing of the unit itself.
Average order value trend · Repeat order contribution · Discounting depth in promotions
relevance 65 · confidence 78
Entrant Compression how easily can newcomers copy them? 27
AI collapses the cost of launching a credible digital-first beauty brand.
Creative, copy, localization, quiz-tech and vision matching all become near-free, leaving contract manufacturing and ad budget as the only real barriers — both purchasable, which is the opposite of a widening moat.
Number of AI-native beauty launches · CAC inflation across DTC beauty · Growth deceleration toward industry flat
relevance 90 · confidence 60

AI Lens thesis

The underlying need — buying makeup and skincare without trying it on — persists and is arguably strengthened by better AI matching, and the monetized unit is a physical shipped product, which is durable. But Oddity is not paid for compliance, liability, or workflow ownership; it is paid because it acquires customers online more cheaply than incumbents and converts them without a store. Cheap intelligence attacks that specific advantage from two sides: it lets AI-native entrants stand up equivalent quiz/vision/creative stacks for near zero, and it lets platform ad systems capture the efficiency gains as higher clearing prices. Simultaneously, agentic shopping threatens to move discovery from bought social feeds — where Oddity is strong — to assistants that rank on efficacy, ingredients, and reviews, where a scaled prestige brand or a clinically differentiated ingredient wins. The favorable path runs through ODDITY LABS: AI applied to molecules produces excludable, patentable scarcity; AI applied to funnels produces a commodity.

Thesis breaker A shipped LABS-derived proprietary active driving gross margin above ~75% with rising repeat-purchase share would break the bear read; conversely, marketing intensity rising while revenue growth decelerates toward industry flatness would confirm the funnel edge has been arbitraged away.
What the market may be underestimating

Upside Cost of launching and localizing new brands falls sharply with generative content and AI-run support — Oddity's real asset may be a repeatable brand-launch machine (a third and fourth brand at low incremental opex) rather than the matching algorithm itself.

Downside If AI shopping agents become a meaningful discovery channel, Oddity has no retail shelf, no fragrance/prestige halo, and no third-party review depth to be surfaced by — it is structurally more dependent on paid social than any legacy peer, so agentic disintermediation hits it harder than the sector.

Outcome range spread 51 · unresolved

24Bear case
46Central case
75Bull case
Three headline numbers, deliberately never blended: Position (which way), Exposure (how much it matters at all), Confidence (how sure). The fingerprint asks every stock the same 11 questions so companies a sector label would lump together get told apart. Not an input to GEM/Coal or the Q/V/S lenses.
Claude Reading
Independent analyst synthesis · claude-opus-4-7 · generated 2026-08-13 01:00:49
Verdict Undervalued but not to $41 — fair value $22-30 on conservative DTC assumptions; starter position at $12.43 justified by net cash floor and 14% FCF yield, but resolution of FCF/earnings divergence and next growth print required before sizing up.

Starting with the raw numbers before anything else: ODD has compounded revenue from $222.6M (2021) to $809.8M (2025) — a 38% CAGR, not the 26% the momentum module reports (which appears to average in a different window). Net income scaled from $13.9M to $110.7M, and 2025 op margin is 14.7% with a 72.7% gross margin — those are software-adjacent gross margins on a beauty P&L. FCF of $83.6M on a $580M market cap is a 14% FCF yield. Cash of $402M against zero debt means EV is ~$180M, giving EV/EBITDA of ~1.4x on trailing EBITDA and EV/sales of 0.22x. Those numbers are, on their face, absurd for a business growing 25% YoY with 14% net margins. Something is off — either the market knows something the filings don't yet show, or this is a genuine dislocation.

The two things that make me pause are the ROIC of -16.96% (which contradicts the +27.9% ROE and looks like a data error or a one-time capital adjustment — worth flagging as anomalous, not accepted at face value), and the FCF CAGR of -1% against earnings CAGR of 37.6%. That divergence matters: $87.6M operating cash flow on $110.7M net income means a ~$23M working-capital or non-cash drag, and if 2025 FCF is flat versus 2021 despite earnings quadrupling, the "clean earnings" story the bulls lean on is not fully clean. Inventory build for international expansion is the charitable read; deteriorating unit economics masked by growth is the bear read. The insider activity is also not neutral in spirit — I see option exercises and awards but only one small sale (11,473 sh); no meaningful insider buying at $12 either, which is what you'd expect if management viewed this as a 3x layup.

On the prior models: the synthesis verdict of $37-41 fair value is directionally defensible but the magnitude is aggressive. A more disciplined DCF on $83.6M FCF, 15% growth fading to 4% over 10 years, 10% discount rate, gets you to roughly $22-28/share equity value plus $8/share net cash — call it $30-36, not $41. The Thesis Evaluation's -6 score is the most honest read here: the bear case (structural DTC CAC inflation, commoditized AI personalization, IL MAKIAGE brand fatigue post-SPAC hype) is real and the market isn't obviously wrong to demand a discount. The classification module calling this "mature_earner" at 80% confidence is wrong — a business going from $222M to $810M in four years is not mature; the pre-flight "high-growth" tag is correct. The Market Narrative module's "fallen-angel, fragile durability" framing is the most useful lens: this is a show-me stock, and the discount persists until a catalyst forces re-rating.

The contrarian case against my own emerging bullishness: beauty DTC is a graveyard (Honest Co., Rent the Runway, Warby Parker all traded down post-SPAC on the same "AI/data moat" pitches), IL MAKIAGE is a single-brand concentration risk, TikTok/Meta CAC has been rising 20%+ annually and every incremental customer is more expensive than the last, and the 72.7% gross margin will get tested when Spoiled Child and future brands need marketing subsidy to scale. If revenue growth decelerates to 10% and operating margin compresses to 8% (both plausible in a mature DTC), earnings drop to ~$55M and even at 12x P/E you get $11-13/share — i.e., the current price is fair, not cheap. That's the market's implicit bet. The question is whether you believe 2025's 25% YoY growth (already a deceleration from 40%+) stabilizes or keeps sliding.

My read: the synthesis is directionally right but the $41 anchor is too generous. Fair value on conservative assumptions is $22-30, on optimistic assumptions is $35-40. Even the low end is a 75%+ upside from $12.43. The risk/reward is genuinely asymmetric because of the net cash cushion ($8+/share of the price is just cash), the FCF yield, and the still-growing top line. But this needs the Q4 2025 or Q1 2026 print to show growth hasn't cracked below 15% and margins hold. A starter position sized for the possibility that DTC fundamentally breaks is warranted; a table-pounding buy is not, because the FCF/earnings divergence and the ROIC anomaly deserve resolution first.

GPT Reading
Independent reading · gpt-5.4 · generated 2026-08-13 01:01:05
Verdict Undervalued at $12.43 — the market is pricing in a sharp deterioration that the current revenue, margin, and balance-sheet data do not justify; fair value looks closer to $20-$25 even on restrained assumptions.

Oddity’s raw numbers look far better than a $580M equity value implies. Revenue has gone from $222.6M in 2021 to $809.8M in 2025, a 3.6x increase in four years, while gross profit rose from $153.2M to $588.7M. This is not low-quality growth bought with collapsing unit economics: gross margin in 2025 is 72.7%, operating margin 14.7%, and net margin 13.7%. Even more important, profitability has held while scaling. Operating income increased from $19.5M in 2021 to $118.8M in 2025, and net income from $13.9M to $110.7M. At $12.43, the stock trades on about 7.2x earnings, 0.98x sales, and only 2.6x EV/EBITDA, with $402.2M of cash and no debt. Backing out that cash, the enterprise value is roughly $180M against $83.6M of free cash flow and $118.8M of operating income. For a branded consumer company still growing 25.2% on the latest annual comparison, that multiple is exceptionally low.

The most telling feature here is that the market is acting as if 2024-2025 earnings are near-peak and fragile, yet the annual progression does not show a business straining to keep profits. Revenue grew 27.2% in 2024 and 25.2% in 2025; net income still rose from $58.5M in 2023 to $101.5M in 2024 and $110.7M in 2025. Yes, operating margin only inched from 17.9% in 2024 to 14.7% in 2025—actually down year over year despite revenue growth—but the bigger picture is that margins remain healthy after a period of rapid scale-up. This matters because the current valuation is what you usually pay for a no-growth or structurally impaired consumer asset, not one compounding revenue above 20% with a fortress balance sheet. Even if earnings merely stabilize around $90M-$100M rather than continue rising sharply, the stock still looks mispriced. A 12x multiple on $100M plus excess cash would support something closer to $20-$25 per share, not $12.

The strongest argument against that bullish read is that this may be a classic digitally native beauty business whose accounting earnings flatter the durability of the franchise. Free cash flow of $83.6M in 2025 is solid, but it did not keep pace with net income, and the momentum data suggest FCF CAGR has been roughly flat despite explosive revenue growth. That can indicate working-capital drag or heavier customer acquisition spending hidden in the P&L rather than capitalized. The deceleration in earnings growth is also real: recent earnings growth of 9.1% trails revenue growth of 25.2%, so incremental revenue is becoming less profitable. Operating income was $115.6M in 2024 and only $118.8M in 2025 despite $162.8M of added revenue; that is a yellow flag, not a footnote. If the core engine is paid marketing and product novelty rather than brand endurance, then today’s 72.7% gross margin may not protect shareholders from future opex inflation.

I still weigh those risks as already more than priced in. The balance sheet gives management unusual room to absorb volatility: cash is nearly 70% of market cap, debt is zero, current ratio is 5.24, and equity stands at $396.5M. A business with this financial profile does not need perfect execution to justify a higher stock price. The negative ROIC figure in the data is probably a metric artifact given the cash-heavy structure and otherwise strong ROE of 27.9%, because it clashes with the plainly positive operating and net income trend. Insider activity shown here is not a strong negative either; the recent items are mostly option exercises and awards, with one modest sale. The market may be skeptical that Oddity deserves a “platform” multiple, and I agree it probably does not. But it also does not need one. This can simply be a profitable growth consumer company with some moderation in margins and still be worth materially more than 0.4x EV/revenue.

What would change my mind is straightforward: if the next annual period shows revenue growth slipping below 15% while operating income falls meaningfully from the current $118.8M, then the bear case that the model is hitting CAC saturation becomes much stronger. Likewise, if gross margin drops from 72.7% toward the mid-60s and free cash flow falls materially below $70M despite continued revenue growth, I would stop treating this as a mispricing and start treating it as a value trap. On the other hand, if Oddity can put up another year of 20%+ revenue growth with operating income holding above $110M and cash remaining near current levels, the stock should not stay at 7x earnings for long.

Grok Reading
Independent reading · grok-4.5 · generated 2026-08-13 01:01:46
Verdict Undervalued high-teens FCF yielder at $12.43 — EV ~$180M for $810M sales / $84M FCF; fair value zone $28–$38 if margins stabilize

Oddity’s numbers describe a business the market has already abandoned while the P&L keeps compounding. Revenue scaled from $222.6M in 2021 to $809.8M in 2025, with net income rising from $13.9M to $110.7M and free cash flow of $83.6M on virtually zero capex. Gross margin sits at 72.7%, the balance sheet holds $402.2M cash against zero debt, and enterprise value is roughly $180M—about 0.22x sales and a bit over 2x FCF. At $12.43 the equity is pricing a collapse that the trailing results have not delivered. Even after the growth rate cooled from the mid-50s to a still-solid 25% year-over-year, you are paying roughly 5–7x earnings for a net-margin business still printing mid-teens profitability and a fortress liquidity position that covers most of the market cap.

What actually stands out is the 2024–2025 operating inflection, not the top line. Revenue jumped $163M and gross profit rose $120M, yet operating income barely moved—$115.6M to $118.8M—so incremental dollars were absorbed almost entirely by opex. Net income growth slowed to 9%, FCF CAGR is flat-to-negative, and the ROIC print is nonsensical garbage against an otherwise clean, debt-free ROE of 28%. That pattern is consistent with a DTC beauty engine fighting rising customer acquisition costs and heavier brand spend to defend growth. The rule-based “mature earner” label and the pre-flight “high-growth” label are both half-right: this is a scaled, cash-generative consumer franchise whose growth is decelerating into the mid-20s while the cost structure is still being stress-tested. The valuation models screaming $37–$41 fair value are directionally correct on the cash math, but they underweight how quickly beauty CAC can erase the operating leverage that made 2023–2024 look special.

The strongest case against owning it is exactly that opex absorption. If the 14.7% operating margin and 13.7% net margin are peak-cycle artifacts of a still-maturing paid-acquisition machine, then 7x earnings is not a gift—it is a fair multiple on a business about to re-rate toward low-single-digit growth and mid-single-digit margins. AI personalization and ODDITY LABS sound like moats until every competitor runs the same lookalike and try-on stack; the SPAC-era narrative already died once, and insider activity is noise (option exercises and awards, one modest sale). A smart bear also notes that $84M of FCF against $111M of net income is decent conversion today but has not grown, so the “cash compounder” story is not yet proven through a full CAC cycle. I weigh this seriously—the 2025 operating stall is real—but it does not justify an EV that is a small fraction of one year’s gross profit. You are not paying for the AI story; you are paying a liquidation-ish multiple for a still-growing, high-gross-margin brand that already cleared $100M of net income.

I would flip to neutral or bearish if the next two reported periods show operating income flat or down again while revenue growth slips into the low teens, or if FCF falls below $60M as marketing intensity rises without LTV proof. Re-acceleration of operating leverage back above 16–17% margins with sustained 20%+ revenue growth would push me from undervalued to aggressively long. Until one of those paths resolves, the asymmetry at $12.43 favors the buyer who can tolerate narrative vacuum.

Big-3 Panel — where each AI stands
Each AI above independently stated a direction (undervalued, fairly valued, or overvalued) and how strongly it believes it (conviction, 0–5). We combine those into a Bull-Bear Index on a 0–10 scale: 5 is neutral, 10 is maximum bullish (undervalued at full conviction), 0 is maximum bearish. We compute the score ourselves with the same arithmetic for every seat — the models never grade their own bullishness — so the three are directly comparable. Δ shows how far each seat sits from the panel average of 8.7; a large Δ marks the dissenting voice, usually the one worth reading.
Claude claude-opus-4-7 8.0
undervalued · conviction 3/5 · Δ -0.7 vs panel · self: 7.0
GPT gpt-5.4 9.0
undervalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +0.3 vs panel · self: 8.0
Grok grok-4.5 9.0
undervalued · conviction 4/5 · Δ +0.3 vs panel · self: 7.0
No second round needed — Panel agreed within band (spread 0: Claude: undervalued · GPT: undervalued · Grok: undervalued) — second round not warranted
Advanced Analysis Forensic deep-dive · four lenses
Four separate reads — Company Quality (is it a great business?), Valuation (is it mispriced?), General Sentiment (how macro + narrative are pushing it), and AI Impact (how the AI wave reshapes it), kept deliberately apart · 2026-08-13 01:11:27
Delvantic - Cairn AI
Crushed-but-real - scale in, short leash 7/10
Strong-quality, cash-rich beauty compounder trading at a real 35-50% discount to sober fair value, but AI commoditizes exactly what management calls the moat - so buy it cheap and keep the leash short.
The cruxWhether the 2025 operating deleverage is investment-phase noise or the leading edge of AI-driven entrant compression eroding ODD's paid-social customer-acquisition advantage.
Forensic checks Derived mechanically from ODD's filed financials — not from the AI lenses
Liquidity & RunwayFortress Balance Sheet
DilutionModerate Dilution
Earnings QualityHigh Earnings Quality
The four lensesswitch a tab for its full read — score + evidence
Company Quality
+57
Strong
edge √Σ 143 · risk √Σ 78 · conf 8/10

ODD is a rapidly scaling business: revenue compounded from $222.6M (2021) to $809.8M (2025), roughly 3.6x in four years, with gross margin expanding from 68.8% to 72.7% and operating margin from 8.8% to a peak of 17.9% in 2024 before softening to 14.7% in 2025. Net income reached $110.7M and FCF $83.6M in 2025 (down from $134.5M in 2024, worth watching). Cash of $413.4M with zero net debt and self-funded growth means survival risk is effectively nil. Earnings quality is clean: OCF/NI 1.23x, accruals -5.3% of assets, Beneish M -2.02 - the reported numbers appear real. The one blemish is per-share discipline: diluted shares rose from 53.5M to 61.5M (about 3.5%/yr), SBC runs 4.2% of revenue, and buybacks only offset about 160% of SBC in dollars but share count is still up. Insider tape is neutral-to-slightly-negative: recent activity is awards, option exercises, and one small $173K sale - no open-market buying to signal conviction. The 2025 margin compression and FCF step-down (despite continued revenue growth) suggest the operating leverage story is not linear and warrants scrutiny of marketing spend and category expansion economics.

Strengths 4
m80
Fortress balance sheet
$413.4M cash, no debt, self-funding $83.6M FCF - zero survival risk and full strategic optionality.
m78
High-quality growth
Revenue 3.6x from 2021 to 2025 ($222.6M to $809.8M) with gross margin expanding to 72.7% - rare combination of scale and margin structure.
m70
Clean earnings quality
OCF/NI 1.23x, accruals -5.3% of assets, Beneish M -2.02 - no mechanical red flags; reported profits are cash-backed.
m55
Genuine operating leverage realized
Operating margin expanded from 8.8% (2021) to 17.9% (2024) as revenue scaled, showing the model does lever.
Concerns 4
m55
2025 margin and FCF give-back
Op margin fell from 17.9% to 14.7% and FCF dropped from $134.5M to $83.6M despite 25% revenue growth - operating leverage reversed this year.
m45
Persistent dilution
Diluted shares up ~15% over four years (53.5M to 61.5M), SBC 4.2% of revenue - meaningful per-share drag not fully neutralized by buybacks.
m25
Neutral-to-soft insider signal
No open-market buying; only awards, option exercises, and one modest $173K sale - no conviction signal from management.
m20
Altman Z in grey zone
Z of 2.42 flagged grey despite huge cash pile - likely a function of asset base composition; worth verifying but not alarming given liquidity.
This looks like a genuinely well-run, high-quality consumer growth business - fortress cash, clean accruals, real cash earnings, and margin structure that a legacy CPG would envy. The two things keeping me from calling it elite are the 2025 operating deleverage (margins and FCF both slipped while revenue kept climbing, which is a live question, not just noise) and the steady per-share dilution that quietly taxes owners. Insiders aren't buying. On the data given, the business is Strong - solidly healthy, improving trajectory intact but not yet proven durable enough for the next rung.
Verify before trusting this (7)
  • Cause of 2025 operating margin drop from 17.9% to 14.7% - marketing spend, new brand launches, or category mix?
  • Working-capital and capex drivers behind FCF falling from $134.5M to $83.6M despite higher net income
  • Customer retention and repeat-purchase economics of Il Makiage and SpoiledChild brands
  • Concentration risk: revenue by brand and geography, and channel dependence (own DTC vs. platforms)
  • SBC grant structure and expected future dilution pace; any authorized buyback capacity
  • Any related-party transactions or founder-family arrangements given controlled-company structure
  • R&D pipeline economics for Brand 3/Brand 4 - are they on track and how much cash absorbed?
Valuation / Mispricing
+34
Undervalued
edge √Σ 102 · risk √Σ 67 · conf 6/10
price $12.90 vs skeptical deserved ~$20-25 (DCF $26, EPV $16.6, ignoring the $80 PE anchor) - roughly 35-50% discount, real margin of safety. attractive below $16.50

The e2e composite fair value of $37.41 and signal-adjusted $41.10 (219% upside) are almost certainly overstated - they're pulled up by an anchored-PE of $80.45 that implies the market pays a premium multiple on peak-margin earnings, which is heroic for a post-SPAC beauty name in a live margin-deleverage year. Strip that out and the more defensible inputs are DCF at $26.32 and an EPV floor of $16.56, bracketing a deserved value in the low-$20s. Against a $12.90 price and ~$576M market cap, that's roughly a 40-50% discount with an EPV floor still ~28% above spot - a real margin of safety, not a rounding error. The Quality lens (Strong, 57) supports paying up rather than down, and earnings quality is high, so no haircut is warranted. What's priced in at $12.90 is essentially the bear: that 2025 operating deleverage is structural, IL MAKIAGE growth mean-reverts, and ODDITY LABS never earns its keep. That's a plausible outcome, but the price already reflects it - you're not paying for the AI/biotech optionality, and even a stabilization scenario gets you back to the EPV floor. The gap is meaningful; the confidence is capped by the fact that the composite FV is clearly inflated and the 2025 margin slip is a live question, not resolved noise.

Cheap signals 3
m68
EPV floor above spot
Earnings-power value of $16.56 is ~28% above the $12.90 price - the no-growth floor already implies upside, which is the cleanest cheapness signal here.
m62
DCF at 2x the price
DCF of $26.32 vs $12.90 implies ~104% upside on a method that discounts real cash flows - even haircutting for the 2025 margin slip, deserved value comfortably clears $20.
m45
Quality-adjusted discount
Strong quality grade (57), high earnings quality, fortress balance sheet - deserved multiple should be above sector average, yet a $576M cap prices the business like a broken SPAC.
Rich / priced-in 3
m55
Anchored-PE is a runaway input
The $80.45 PE anchor drives the $37 composite and $41 signal-adjusted FV but implies paying peak multiples on peak margins during a live deleverage year - discount this input heavily; it's not a credible deserved price.
m30
Ongoing dilution erodes per-share value
Steady share issuance flagged by the quality lens quietly lifts the deserved-price bar; the gap is real but a few points narrower than headline FCF-per-share math suggests.
m25
2025 operating deleverage unresolved
Margins and FCF slipped while revenue grew - if this is structural rather than investment-phase, DCF and PE anchors both come down and the discount shrinks.
I think this is genuinely cheap, but not the 219% cheap the composite is screaming. The $80 PE anchor is nonsense on a deleveraging year - throw it out. What I trust is DCF at $26 and EPV at $16.60, which brackets deserved value in the low-$20s against a $12.90 price. That's a 35-50% discount on a Strong-quality business with clean earnings and a fortress balance sheet - the kind of setup where the bear case is already in the tape. I'd be a buyer here and a more enthusiastic one under $11; above $16.50 the margin of safety gets thin given the unresolved margin question.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • 2026 guidance on gross and operating margin - is the 2025 slip investment-driven or structural
  • IL MAKIAGE vs SpoiledChild segment growth and repeat-purchase cohorts
  • ODDITY LABS spend as % of revenue and any commercialization milestones
  • Share count trajectory and SBC as % of revenue
  • Any one-time costs inflating 2025 opex that normalize in 2026
General Sentiment
-53
Headwind
tail √Σ 43 · head √Σ 101 · conf 6/10

The broad tape is mildly risk-on with a sleepy VIX near 14.6, which would normally be a tailwind for a beta-2.38 name like ODD. But the narrative sitting on this stock is the wrong kind: a fragile, moderate-intensity 'fallen-angel' story with low cult support, meaning there's no true-believer base to defend it on down days. The bear framing (former SPAC-era AI/beauty hype, unproven tech moat) is the dominant market read, and price action confirms it - repeated 7-11% single-day moves with no news attribution signal a thin, jumpy holder base and momentum traders, not conviction capital. Stock-specifically, the macro backdrop (10y 4.7%, mkt PE 26) is worse than the risk-on score implies for a high-beta, unprofitable-perception growth name; ODD's 2.38 beta means any wobble in the tape gets amplified 2x here. There's no visible analyst upgrade cycle or positive catalyst flow to lean against the bear narrative, and the newsless volatility itself is a tell - when a stock swings double-digits on nothing, sentiment is fragile and sellers are in control on rallies. Net: modest headwind. Not a narrative collapse in progress, but no one is defending this name either, and the macro-sensitivity math works against it.

Tailwinds 2
m35
Calm VIX and established risk-on regime
VIX 14.6 and an 8-day established risk-on tape give beaten-down high-beta names room to bounce. This is why ODD can rip 4-7% on nothing - but it's a shallow tailwind, not a rerating force.
m25
Strong price momentum score
Momentum reads strong_positive with a 26% CAGR flag, suggesting the recent trajectory hasn't fully broken. Some trend-followers may still be engaged, cushioning downside.
Headwinds 4
m62
Fallen-angel narrative with fragile durability
The market frames ODD as a busted SPAC-era AI/beauty story. Fragile durability and low cult coefficient mean any disappointment gets punished without a believer base to buy the dip.
m55
Newsless double-digit swings signal thin conviction
Five recent 4-11% moves with zero news attribution shows the holder base is momentum/technical, not fundamental. That kind of tape is a persistent overhang - rallies get sold, drops accelerate.
m50
Beta 2.38 amplifies a macro backdrop that isn't as friendly as it looks
Headline risk-on score is +51, but 10y at 4.7% and market PE 26 are real headwinds for high-beta growth-adjacent names. ODD gets 2x the pain of any tape wobble.
m30
No visible analyst tailwind or positive news flow
Nothing in the brief points to target hikes, upgrades, or a catalyst narrative building. Silence on a fragile story is itself a mild headwind - stories need feeding to hold.
Net headwind, not a strong one. The tape itself is fine, but ODD is a fragile fallen-angel story with no cult, no visible analyst tailwind, and a jumpy holder base that trades it like a lottery ticket - the newsless 10% down days tell you sellers control the marginal decision. High beta amplifies a macro setup (4.7% 10y, PE 26) that's genuinely less friendly than the risk-on headline. I lean headwind with medium conviction; a real catalyst could flip this fast given how washed-out sentiment already is, but absent that, the pressure keeps leaking down.
Verify before trusting this (5)
  • Whether the next earnings print reinforces or cracks the AI/biotech-moat bull case (durability test)
  • Any sell-side re-engagement - target revisions or new coverage that could reset the narrative
  • Whether the newsless swings resolve into a directional trend or continue as choppy noise
  • Sector rotation into consumer discretionary / beauty peers that could drag ODD along
  • Any 10y move above 4.8% or VIX break above 18 - would hit this 2.38-beta name disproportionately
The market-wide tape + this name's exposure to it (beta / sector / narrative durability). Context on the non-fundamental pressure — not a call on the business or the price. processId: detail-general-sentiment
AI Impact
+4
Mixed - the product survives, the tech premium may not
opp √Σ 68 · thr √Σ 56 · conf 6/10

The underlying need — buying makeup and skincare without trying it on — persists and is arguably strengthened by better AI matching, and the monetized unit is a physical shipped product, which is durable. But Oddity is not paid for compliance, liability, or workflow ownership; it is paid because it acquires customers online more cheaply than incumbents and converts them without a store. Cheap intelligence attacks that specific advantage from two sides: it lets AI-native entrants stand up equivalent quiz/vision/creative stacks for near zero, and it lets platform ad systems capture the efficiency gains as higher clearing prices. Simultaneously, agentic shopping threatens to move discovery from bought social feeds — where Oddity is strong — to assistants that rank on efficacy, ingredients, and reviews, where a scaled prestige brand or a clinically differentiated ingredient wins. The favorable path runs through ODDITY LABS: AI applied to molecules produces excludable, patentable scarcity; AI applied to funnels produces a commodity.

AI opportunities 4
m53
Underlying Need Persistence
Demand for cosmetics, skincare and haircare is durable and non-informational.
m19
Solution Persistence
Buying beauty online sight-unseen persists, but not necessarily through Oddity's funnel.
m15
Customer DIY Preference
Consumers cannot self-manufacture cosmetics; DIY is not the threat vector.
m36
Revenue Unit Durability
The monetized unit is a shipped physical good — no seats, no tokens to deflate.
AI threats 4
m31
Intelligence Commoditization
Cheap models copy Oddity's stated moat more than they power it.
m4
Responsibility Transfer
Consumers pay for a product, not for someone to absorb liability.
m22
AI Intermediation Position
Agentic shopping likely routes around a paid-social-dependent DTC brand.
m41
Entrant Compression
AI collapses the cost of launching a credible digital-first beauty brand.
Oddity's product economics are durable but its advertised AI edge is the single most commoditizable asset it owns — the opportunity only exists if ODDITY LABS turns intelligence into patented molecules rather than better ad targeting. Position 47 with a 24-75 range: the physical, repeat-purchase revenue unit scores 78 while intelligence commoditization (33) and entrant compression (27) attack the differentiator the equity story is built on, and agentic discovery (36) threatens a business whose only distribution is bought attention. Watch marketing spend as a percentage of revenue against operating margin — the 17.9%→14.7% step down in 2025 is the first observable that the funnel advantage is being arbitraged. The re-rate trigger is narrow and specific: a shipped SKU containing a LABS-derived proprietary active with patent coverage and gross margin pushing past 75%.
Verify before trusting this (8)
  • Competitors launching vision matching tools
  • Cost per creative asset disclosed
  • Conversion rate trend vs prior years
  • Number of AI-native beauty launches
  • CAC inflation across DTC beauty
  • Growth deceleration toward industry flat
  • LABS patents filed or granted
  • Proprietary ingredient in shipped SKU
The structural effect of the AI wave on this specific business over the next ~5 years — demand, cost leverage, moat, barriers to entry, position in the AI stack. The reality beneath the AI story, not the story's market pressure (General Sentiment owns that) — and not a call on the business today or the price.
Please log in to view trade setups
The Augustus trade-setup read is a members feature.
Log in
Four lenses kept deliberately separate — Company Quality (price-agnostic), Valuation (price-conditional), General Sentiment (non-fundamental macro/narrative pressure), and AI Impact (structural ~5yr AI exposure). The scores are not blended. Filing-level items (convertibles, lock-ups, customer concentration) are v2 — see each lens's "verify."
Community AI Feedback
No community reviews yet for ODD. Be the first — hit How to Contribute, have any AI review this page, and paste its take back here.
My Notes personal — only you see this
Data via Financial Modeling Prep · Cached for performance · twelvedata
v1.1.530 · 761561a2 · 2026-08-12 19:06:35