Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc (ADAP)

Awarener score: 2.8

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 (Bottom), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Bottom).

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 an extremely fast pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
  • Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 2.5

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

Growth score: 2.3

  • Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been a slight improvement 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: 2.3

  • ADAP 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 very large portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
  • The company grows very little in relation to research and development efforts. It stands rather normal in relation to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.0

  • Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc 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: 2.8

  • ADAP 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 investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is similar to 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 has heavily enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains lacking 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 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: 6.5

  • Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a non-significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is safer. It happens to be weak when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has more than enough short-term resources to face short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are non-significant. 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 weak 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 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 month and a half credit. It still ranks almost average when measured against peers.
  • Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
  • We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
  • Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
  • Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against similar companies.
  • Company earns net interest income on its investments and therefore is in a quite comfortable financial position. It stands top-notch 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.
  • Last twelve months revenues were non-significant in relation to fixed assets. The company must improve income to take advantage of used resources. It looks rather normal in relation 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: 2.5

  • Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc 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 close to average when compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed lots of funds. Either it reinvested heavily in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands worse than most similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes plenty 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 outstanding business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still weak when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has greatly 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 plenty more stockholders. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • This company is sitting in a mountain of cash. It's very well poised to substantially increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks well ranked 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 huge relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks close to average when compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty of money. It happens to be weak when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extremely low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is significantly in dispute. It's still in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.3


ADAP logos

Company at a glance: Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc (ADAP)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: 0.29 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.02 billions

Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc, a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, focuses on providing novel cell therapies primarily to patients with solid tumors in the United States and the United Kingdom. The company's specific peptide enhanced affinity receptor (SPEAR) T-cell platform enables it to identify cancer targets. It is developing ADP-A2M4 that is in phase II clinical trials with SPEARHEAD-1 for synovial sarcoma and myxoid round cell liposarcoma indications (MRCLS); in phase II clinical trials with SPEARHEAD-2 for patients with head and neck cancer; and in phase I clinical trials for urothelial, melanoma, head and neck, ovarian, non-small cell lung, esophageal and gastric, synovial sarcoma, and MRCLS cancers. The company is also developing ADP-A2AFP, which is in phase I clinical trials for hepatocellular carcinoma; and ADP-A2M4CD8, which is in phase I clinical trial for SPEAR T-cells focusing on treating patients with lung, gastroesophageal, head and neck, ovarian, and bladder cancers. It has a collaboration and license agreement with GSK; third party collaborations with Noile-Immune Biotech Inc., Alpine Immune Sciences, Inc., and National Center for Cancer Immune Therapy in Denmark; strategic alliance agreement with the MD Anderson Cancer Center; and co-development and co-commercialization agreement with Universal Cells, Inc. Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc also has a strategic collaboration and license agreement with Genentech, Inc. and F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd to develop personalized allogeneic T-cell therapies utilizing aß T-cell receptors. Adaptimmune Therapeutics plc was founded in 2008 and is headquartered in Abingdon, the United Kingdom.

Awarener score: 2.8

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 (Bottom), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Bottom).