Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD)

Awarener score: 4.8

Conclusion

The higher the Awarener score, the more bang you get for the buck. It measures how much genuine funds the company generates for the stock price paid (Poor), the business stability (Modest) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Modest).

Note: All scores range from 1 (worst) to 10 (best). Conclusions are updated daily with closing stock prices and new reported quarterly financial statements.

Revenue score: 7.0

  • Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 3.3

  • ACAD profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually huge. They stand top-notch against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be extremely poor. It's great when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually extremely poor. They remain excellent in relation to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be extremely poor in relation to total revenues. They're still better than most similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually extremely poor considering total sales, and remain great when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be extremely poor when confronted to sales. Company stands great when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 2.0

  • ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been close to average when compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
  • In past years, the company couldn't always turn a profit -available to repay debt and purchase properties-, which compares last-in-rank when measured against peer enterprises.
  • In the previous years, the firm couldn't always make a profit -before income taxes and interests on loans taken-. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, at least once the company lost money -before income taxes-. It was bottom tier against rivals.
  • In the previous years, the firm had at least a total net loss, and last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • The company lost money at least once in the past years. It's been a disappointment compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

  • ACAD had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a substantial portion of revenues. It's great when measured against competitors.
  • The company grows sparsely in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a slight improvement compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.0

  • ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain close to average when compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually insufficient. It ranks almost average when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got very poor returns -on the tangible resources it controls-. This metric is usually related to the industry in which operates and combines profitability versus reinvestment needs. It's similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 2.6

  • ACAD on average doesn't generate genuine funds, so to buy or replace property, plants and equipment must either burn existing cash or increase debt. It stands similar to rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing most of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, and saving a little funds for something else, which is below average when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months the stock paid no dividends. It came bottom tier against competitors.
  • The company pays no dividend, so measuring its growth is meaningless. The company has behaved in an conservative way compared to similar firms.
  • As no dividends are paid, it is useless trying to estimate their sustainability in time. Sustainability looks not applicable in regard to comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent in relation to peer enterprises.
  • Repurchase effectiveness metric is very complex. Run again in analytical mode if you're interested in a technical explanation. It stands in a very weak position compared to rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.8

  • ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely irrelevant. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a tenth of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have minor claims on the company, and financial position is safe. It remains somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • A substantial portion of resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is better for liquidity. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has abundant dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's in a weak position compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
  • Normally has approximately five months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than six months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers many months after the purchase. It ranks almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company charges its customers long before it must pay its suppliers, so the more it sales, the more free funds it gets. It's rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • To what extent normalized EBITDA covers interest expenses is not known. It stands impossible to compare against rival firms.
  • Business has usually been operated at a loss. Unless prospects improve, the company is no position to decrease loans taken levels but by additional shareholders' funding. Profitability must improve. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are quite good in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. The more property, plant, and equipment used, the more the company must reinvest to fight obsolescence, which usually means less available funds for the shareholders in the long run. It looks excellent in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is very good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.4

  • ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. reported losses, so valuating it in relation to earnings is meaningless. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
  • Price-to-Tangible-Book-Value is a fairly complex metric. Run again in analytical mode if you're interested in a technical explanation. It remains in a very weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could get, it reinvested in the business, which stands better than most similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes more funds than can genuinely generate. Business needs are meet by borrowing money or consuming preexistent cash, which can only keep up until a certain limit. Unless the company is driving business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still great when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. It came up impressive in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company has substantial more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation has been negative, as the company lost money. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks a slight improvement compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains worse than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost significant money. It happens to be great when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 3.8


ACAD logos

Company at a glance: ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: 2.92 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.51 billions

ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on the development and commercialization of small molecule drugs that address unmet medical needs in central nervous system disorders. The company offers NUPLAZID (pimavanserin) for the treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with Parkinson's disease psychosis. It's pipeline include, pimavanserin, under phase 3 development for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease psychosis, and negative symptoms of schizophrenia; Trofinetide, a novel synthetic analog, under phase 3 development for the treatment of Rett syndrome; ACP-044, a novel first-in-class orally administered non-opioid analgesic, under phase 2 development for treating acute and chronic pain; and ACP-319, a positive allosteric modulator of the muscarinic receptor, under phase 1 development for treating schizophrenia and cognition in Alzheimer's. ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. was founded in 1993 and is headquartered in San Diego, California.

Awarener score: 4.8

Conclusion

The higher the Awarener score, the more bang you get for the buck. It measures how much genuine funds the company generates for the stock price paid (Poor), the business stability (Modest) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Modest).