Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation (ADPT)

Awarener score: 4.2

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 (Very poor), the business stability (unknown) 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: 9.0

  • Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 3.2

  • ADPT profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually excellent. They stand better than most 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

  • Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been rather normal in relation 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

  • ADPT 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: 3.0

  • Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves great when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets meagre proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks great when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got meagre 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.5

  • ADPT 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 great when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is encouraging in relation 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 significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent in relation to peer enterprises.
  • We are not sure on the effectiveness of the company when repurchasing shares, as there were not enough numbers to crunch. It stands unidentified against rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.8

  • Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be last-in-rank 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 quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains mediocre against rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. It looks last-in-rank 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 four 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 before a month from the purchase. It ranks substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers six months or more before charging its customers, so there's abundant money invested in working capital. It's lacking compared to 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 a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.2

  • Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation 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 lacking compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands slightly better than similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes much 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 significant business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still similar to 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 excellent 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 large relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks a slight improvement 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 a lot of money. It happens to be encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a very low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is in dispute. It's still in good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 4.0


ADPT logos

Company at a glance: Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation (ADPT)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: 1.11 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.16 billions

Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation, a commercial-stage company, develops an immune medicine platform for the diagnosis and treatment of various diseases. The company offers immunoSEQ, a platform and core immunosequencing product that is used to answer translational research questions, as well as to discover new prognostic and diagnostic signals; and T-Detect COVID for the confirmation of past COVID-19 infection. It also provides clonoSEQ, a clinical diagnostic product for the detection and monitoring of minimal residual disease in patients with multiple myeloma, B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia, as well as available as a CLIA-validated laboratory developed test for patients with other lymphoid cancers; and immunoSEQ T-MAP COVID for vaccine developers and researchers to measure the T-cell immune response to vaccines. In addition, the company offers a pipeline of clinical products and services that are used for the diagnosing, monitoring, and treatment of diseases, such as cancer, autoimmune conditions, and infectious diseases. It serves the life sciences research, clinical diagnostics, and drug discovery applications. Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation has strategic collaborations with Genentech, Inc. for the development, manufacture, and commercialization of neoantigen directed T cell therapies for the treatment of a range of cancers; and Microsoft Corporation to develop diagnostic tests for the early detection of various diseases from a single blood test. The company was formerly known as Adaptive TCR Corporation and changed its name to Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation in December 2011. Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation was incorporated in 2009 and is headquartered in Seattle, Washington.

Awarener score: 4.2

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 (Very poor), the business stability (unknown) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Modest).