Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: American Campus Communities, Inc. (ACC)

Awarener score: 5.4

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 (Modest), the business stability (Good) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Good).

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: 5.5

  • Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
  • American Campus Communities, Inc. business trend stability is good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 8.0

  • ACC profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very good. They stand mediocre against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be excellent. It's weak when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually excellent. They remain in a very weak position compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be very good in relation to total revenues. They're still worse than most similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually good considering total sales, and remain weak when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands substantially worse when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 7.0

  • American Campus Communities, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been lacking compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a low step, which has been slightly worse than comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very low pace, which compares below average when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a normal tempo. It turns to be close to average when compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an extremely fast speed. It was better than most rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been extremely high, and top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at an extremely fast rhythm in past years. It's been impressive in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 9.0

  • ACC managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. It's been worse than most peers.
  • The company does not report R&D expenses. It's meaningless to measure in relation to competitors.
  • We have insufficient data to estimate how effective is research and development effort. It stands unknown against rival companies.

Profitability score: 5.5

  • American Campus Communities, Inc. usually gets sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually modest. It ranks substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got sufficient 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.7

  • ACC usually uses a sparse portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is modest. It stands substantially worse when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is below average when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came mediocre against competitors.
  • In recent years, has slightly cut back dividend payments. The company has behaved lacking compared to similar firms.
  • The company pays more dividends than genuine funds is usually able to generate, therefore borrowing more funds. Future payments may be at risk, especially if a downturn in business occurs. Sustainability looks slightly worse than comparable companies.
  • The company barely enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in slightly more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains rather normal 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 rather normal in relation to rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.9

  • American Campus Communities, 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 roughly double short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are normally not an issue. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar firms.
  • A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains worse than most rival firms.
  • Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks below average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less than one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly worse than peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers less than one month before charging its customers, so there's little money invested in working capital. It's in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Usual business earnings are mostly consumed by net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but stockholders not so much. Profitability must increase, lest the firm risks only working for creditors' benefit. It stands mediocre against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been very low when measured against loans taken. Even significantly cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than ten years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks weak when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are somewhat low 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.9

  • American Campus Communities, Inc. profits are really small compared to market valuation, market valuation doesn't rely on current earnings. It happens to be substantially worse 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 weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could generate, it reinvested in the business, which stands somewhat worse than similar companies.
  • In the past years the company barely generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still weak when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up rather normal in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is huge, as profits were extremely low in relative terms. It ranks substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a huge relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks a disappointment 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 mediocre against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a little money. It happens to be substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a mediocre earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.2


ACC logos

Company at a glance: American Campus Communities, Inc. (ACC)

Sector, industry: Real Estate, REIT—Residential

Market Cap: 18.13 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.98 billions

American Campus Communities, Inc. is the largest owner, manager and developer of high-quality student housing communities in the United States. The company is a fully integrated, self-managed and self-administered equity real estate investment trust (REIT) with expertise in the design, finance, development, construction management and operational management of student housing properties. As of September 30, 2020, American Campus Communities owned 166 student housing properties containing approximately 111,900 beds. Including its owned and third-party managed properties, ACC's total managed portfolio consisted of 204 properties with approximately 139,900 beds.

Awarener score: 5.4

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 (Modest), the business stability (Good) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Good).