FCF $811m — respectable but not differentiating · TTM from SEC filings (OCF − CapEx), four quarters to 08/26.
Rev-8.0%TTM YoYD
Revenue -8.0% — meaningful contraction · Latest four quarters of revenue vs the four before them, from SEC filings.
D/E0.28A-
D/E 0.28 — less debt than most Consumer Cyclical peers (≈25th pctile)
P/E14.5xB+
P/E 14.5 — below the Consumer Cyclical median (≈40th pctile)
PEG*——
PEG n/a — analysts expect next year's earnings to be no higher than last year's
* PEG n/a — analysts expect next year's earnings to be no higher than last year's
Targets: 1-year is analyst consensus where covered, 5- and 10-year are model estimates; the DCF is a cross-check, not a target. Methodology
Quality-growth score · 25.3
Quality56.6
Growth13.0
Value22.2
Why this score
Buying back stock
Entry · Margin of safety
52-week rangeNear 52-week low
43% off the 12-month high
vs DCF fair value140% aboveest. fair value ~$32
What the price assumes: free cash flow growing about 21% next year, slowing to 4% a year by year ten — vs a starting rate of ~-5% our model takes as the middle of three readings — analyst estimates, last year's revenue growth, and the company's own multi-year record.
Quality signals
ROIC5.2% · C+return on invested capital — leads the quality score
Model-generatedWritten from the fundamentals then; figures in the text are as of that day, today's are above · Editorial standards
Why now
Lennar’s Homebuilding West segment is riding the surge in single‑family demand in Sun Belt metros, delivering $717 m of free‑cash‑flow and a solid 4.9% profit margin despite a -7.4% revenue decline YoY; the Bull Rankings model gives LEN a Quality‑growth score of 31.5, with Quality (59) as the strongest pillar, underscoring its operational discipline and low 0.29 debt‑to‑equity ratio. The market already prices in a 28% annual FCF growth via the reverse‑DCF, so the thesis hinges on the company sustaining that cash‑flow expansion through continued land‑bank development and mortgage‑service synergies.
Moat
LEN’s integrated Financial Services arm locks in home‑buyer financing, title insurance and closing services, creating a captive pipeline that boosts margins and deters rivals from poaching customers; this end‑to‑end offering translates into the observed 4.9% profit margin and underpins the 59 Quality score, while the low leverage (0.29 D/E) gives it fiscal flexibility that competitors lack.
Risk
The bear case centers on the sharp -7.4% revenue contraction and a modest 7.5% ROE, indicating earnings are not scaling with capital; combined with a high beta of 1.4, any slowdown in housing demand or rising rates could compress margins further and invalidate the 28% FCF growth assumption. A sustained drop below the 52‑week low of $79.83 would confirm the downside.
Horizon
1-3 yr $77.87 (15-analyst consensus) — multiple re-rating thesis requires a catalyst. 5 yr $98.30 at ~5% CAGR — dividend + buyback compounding. 10 yr $126.07 if the moat survives secular pressure.
LEN vs the Top Picks average
Pillar
LEN
Book avg
Diff
Quality
57
83
-26
Growth
13
89
-76
Value
22
76
-54
Average of today's Top 30 (mean score 82.6); size and sector limits also decide the book.
Score history · LEN
Trend
-10.5 over 82 daily scores
From 35.8 (Jun 22) → 25.3 (now)
One point per daily run; read From → To for the actual range.
LEN at a glance
Same audited fundamentals as the score, unless a card says otherwise.
Analyst estimate revisions
30-day change
-18.7%
90-day change
-20.4%
Forward EPS estimate
$5.26
Over the last 90 days, what analysts expect LEN to earn is materially lower (-20.4%). The estimate is derived from price and forward P/E captured at the same instant, so a moving share price does not move this number — only a changed forecast does.
Estimates move both ways and are not part of the Bull Rankings score. Biggest movers →
Position sizing · LEN
$
%
%
Shares to buy
26
Position size
$1,994
4.0% of portfolio
Stop price
$57.52
25% below $76.69
$ at risk if stopped
$498.49
budget $500.00 · 1% of portfolio
Math only: excludes commissions, slippage and gap risk. Inputs stay in your browser.
Lennar Corporation (LEN): score, valuation & FAQ
Lennar Corporation (LEN) is a Residential Construction company that scores 25.3 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth model — a weak reading. The score blends three pillars — quality (durable returns, healthy margins, low leverage), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (valuation versus sector peers) — into one number, refreshed daily; it is a screen, not a buy recommendation.
Its strongest graded signals are D/E (A-) and P/E (B+), while Rev (D) rate weaker. On valuation, LEN sits about 140% above our discounted-cash-flow fair value — the current price implies free cash flow growing about 21% next year, slowing to 4% a year by year ten.
Is LEN a good stock to buy?
Bull Rankings scores LEN 25.3 out of 100 on its quality-growth model, which is a weak reading. That is driven by D/E (A-) and P/E (B+). A score is a quantitative screen of Lennar Corporation's fundamentals, not personalised financial advice — weigh it against your own time horizon and risk tolerance, and read the risk factors below before acting.
Why does LEN score 25.3 on Bull Rankings?
The score leans on quality at 56.6 out of 100, with growth the weakest pillar at 13.0 — the three combine geometrically, so a weak one cannot be papered over by a strong one. LEN earns its highest marks on D/E (A-) and P/E (B+), and is held back by Rev (D). Each signal is graded against sector-aware thresholds rather than one absolute bar, so LEN is measured against Residential Construction peers, not against the market as a whole.
Is LEN overvalued or undervalued?
Based on $76.69, LEN sits about 140% above our discounted-cash-flow fair value — the current price implies free cash flow growing about 21% next year, slowing to 4% a year by year ten. It trades at a 14.5x P/E (graded B+). Discounted-cash-flow estimates are sensitive to growth and discount-rate assumptions, so treat this as a cross-check, not a price target.
What are the main risks of investing in LEN?
The bear case centers on the sharp -7.4% revenue contraction and a modest 7.5% ROE, indicating earnings are not scaling with capital; combined with a high beta of 1.4, any slowdown in housing demand or rising rates could compress margins further and invalidate the 28% FCF growth assumption. A sustained drop below the 52‑week low of $79.83 would confirm the downside.