• Twitter
• Facebook
• Snapchat
• Pinterest
• LinkedIn
• Tumblr

---

Fundamental analysis: Ascent Industries Co. (ACNT)

Awarener score: 6.3

Conclusion

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 growing at a low pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
• Ascent Industries Co. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 4.3

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

Growth score: 1.9

• Ascent Industries Co. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a good pace. It's been lacking 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: 10.0

• ACNT managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been better 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

• Ascent Industries Co. 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 a disappointment 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: 5.2

• ACNT usually uses a significant portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is abundant. It stands substantially worse when measured against 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 substantially worse 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 enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a very weak position compared to peer enterprises.
• Repurchase effectiveness metric is very complex. Run again in analytical mode if you're interested in a technical explanation. It stands close to average when compared to rivals.
• The company uses a non-significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors. The company is usually improving its financial position, and could greatly boost stockholder rewards if it wished so. It still looks top tier when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.9

• Ascent Industries Co. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be weak 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 impressive 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 bottom tier against rival firms.
• Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's close to average when compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month and a half credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a very weak position compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
• On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks weak when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers four months or more before charging its customers, so there's significant money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a significant portion of usual business earnings, but are mostly bearable. It stands worse than most rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been low when measured against loans taken. Even cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than seven years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks substantially worse 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is excellent when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.5

• Ascent Industries Co. looks cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be weak 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat worse than similar companies.
• The company usually generates much more genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Surplus cash may be used to repay loans, to eventually buy new businesses, or to reward investors. Considering the financial position and stock price, at the current price the share might be very interesting. It's still substantially worse when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has significantly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. Future profits need to be high enough to justify the measure, as the pie of earnings will now be split among numerous more stockholders. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
• The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks bottom tier against similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks very cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be very attractive. It ranks similar to peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks a slight improvement compared to rival firms.
• The stock price is at or below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is really low, the stock may be selling a t a discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains slightly better than peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned great money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be weak when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.6

---

Awarener score: 6.3

Conclusion

Support us!

We are an independent project. No ads, no suscription, no registration required.

• Donate!