ATM Detection

ATM offerings are the dominant slow-bleed dilution mechanism in small caps.
Detecting them requires inference from multiple co-occurring signals —
no single filing or phrase is sufficient. Most quant pipelines either
miss them entirely (looking only for 8-K item 3.02) or flag every S-3
as ATM (false positives that drown the signal).

Core inference rule

An ATM is ACTIVE only when all three are true:

1. There is an effective shelf registration (S-3, S-3ASR, F-3) AND
2. There is a sales agreement with a placement agent referenced
   in a recent 424B prospectus supplement (typically 424B5 for US, 424B4
   for FPIs) AND
3. The agreement / supplement contains language explicitly authorizing
   at-the-market sales (vs. a one-shot registered direct).

Missing any one of these = NOT an active ATM (could be dormant shelf,
could be a registered direct, could be a private placement).

Required signals (decision matrix)

Signal	Where it lives	What to look for
Effective shelf	S-3 / S-3ASR / F-3 with effective status	effectiveDate is set
Placement agent retained	424B5 / 424B4 cover or "Plan of Distribution" section	Named agent (one or more)
ATM authorization language	424B prospectus supplement OR underlying sales agreement (often filed as Ex-1.1 or Ex-10.x to an 8-K)	See phrase list below
Active ATM (not just authorized)	Subsequent 10-Q "Stockholders' Equity" or "Subsequent Events" note	Discloses shares sold under ATM during period, OR confirms agreement remains in effect

The first two confirm STRUCTURE. The third confirms TYPE (ATM vs.
registered direct). The fourth confirms ACTIVITY (in-use vs. dormant).

Phrases that indicate ATM (not exhaustive)

In the prospectus supplement or sales agreement:

• "at-the-market offering" / "at the market offerings"
• "sales agreement" with a placement agent (this phrase is the
  highest-precision single signal in 424B documents)
• "controlled equity offering" / "Controlled Equity Offering"
  (a Cantor Fitzgerald trademarked term — same mechanism)
• "common stock purchase agreement" — usually ELOC, not ATM (see
  below)
• "ordinary brokers' transactions"
• "negotiated transactions"
• "block trades, if and when negotiated"
• "as defined in Rule 415(a)(4)" (the regulatory hook for ATMs)
• "any method permitted by law deemed to be an 'at the market' offering"

ATM vs ELOC vs Registered Direct (the three confusions)

These mechanisms all use a shelf and dribble shares into the market,
but they are NOT the same and have different toxicity profiles.

Mechanism	Counterparty	Pricing	Discretion	Typical agreement language
ATM	Placement agent (bank) selling into open market	Market price	Issuer-controlled volume	"Sales Agreement" / "at-the-market"
ELOC	Specific investor (e.g., Lincoln Park, Yorkville, B. Riley)	Discount to recent VWAP	Issuer-initiated puts	"Common Stock Purchase Agreement" / "Equity Line" / "Standby Equity Purchase Agreement"
Registered Direct	One-time investor(s)	Negotiated, typically discount	Single-shot	"Securities Purchase Agreement" + 424B5 covering only that takedown

ELOCs are typically MORE toxic per share than ATMs (forced discount,
counterparty incentivized to short into puts) but often slower per day.
A registered direct is one-and-done — confirm via 8-K item 1.01 + 3.02
within days.

Common false positives and false negatives

False positives (saying "ATM active" when it isn't):

• Effective S-3 with no 424B in 6+ months → dormant shelf, no ATM in flight.
• 424B5 for a registered direct (one-time financing) — language will
  reference a "Securities Purchase Agreement" with named investors,
  not a "Sales Agreement" with an agent.
• 424B5 for an underwritten secondary — has an "Underwriting Agreement",
  fixed share count, single offering.

False negatives (missing an active ATM):

• ATM established years ago, recently re-upped via prospectus supplement
  amendment (424B3) — easy to miss if you only watch B5.
• ATM language buried in the SALES AGREEMENT (Ex-1.1) rather than the
  424B itself; some issuers reference but do not duplicate.
• FPIs use 424B4 instead of 424B5 — searching only B5 misses them.
• Re-stated/amended 424Bs (e.g., 424B5/A) that supersede prior versions.

Workflow when asked "does company X have an ATM"

1. Pull all forms in the last ~12 months: S-3, S-3ASR, F-3, plus
   all 424B variants (B1–B7) plus 8-Ks with attached agreements.
2. Confirm shelf is effective. If no effective S-3/F-3, stop —
   no ATM possible.
3. Look for 424B with sales-agreement language. Highest-precision
   single phrase: "sales agreement" + named agent in the cover/Plan
   of Distribution.
4. Distinguish from registered direct / ELOC. Apply the table above.
   If the agreement is a "Common Stock Purchase Agreement" with a single
   investor, it's an ELOC, not an ATM.
5. Check active vs dormant. Pull the most recent 10-Q. The
   "Stockholders' Equity" or "Subsequent Events" note usually states
   whether the ATM remains effective and how much has been sold during
   the period.
6. Stamp with lookahead-safety. Whatever you conclude is true
   only as of the LATEST filing in your set. An ATM established last
   week was not active last month.

Decision rule for "is dilution imminent"

Active ATM + low cash runway (<6 months) in last 10-Q + recent strength
(green day, gap up) = highest-probability dilution window. Issuers
with active ATMs sell aggressively into strength because that is when
they get the best price.

Phrases that should trigger this skill

• "is X doing an ATM"
• "active ATM" / "at-the-market offering"
• "controlled equity offering"
• "ELOC" / "equity line of credit"
• "shelf takedown"
• "is this S-3 in use"
• "registered direct vs ATM"
• "Sales Agreement" / "Common Stock Purchase Agreement"
• "Lincoln Park" / "Yorkville" / "B. Riley" + offering context

What this skill is NOT

This is not a parser. It does not extract numbers from filings. It
provides the inference rules needed to interpret the parsed data
correctly — i.e., to decide whether a set of filings constitutes
an active ATM. Combine with sec-filing-types for form semantics,
lookahead-safety for time semantics, and (when available)
bank-tier-classification for placement-agent toxicity grading.