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

---

Fundamental analysis: AFC Gamma, Inc. (AFCG)

Awarener score: 7.4

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: a result could not be reached

• Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
• AFC Gamma, Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 10.0

• AFCG profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually huge. They stand well ranked against rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be huge. It's encouraging in relation to competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually huge. They remain close to average when compared to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be huge in relation to total revenues. They're still well ranked against similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually huge considering total sales, and remain top tier when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be huge when confronted to sales. Company stands top tier when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: could not be analyzed

• AFC Gamma, Inc. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
• There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown against comparable firms.
• EBITDA growth is unknown due to insufficient inputs, which compares unknown against peer enterprises.
• We were not able to provide an estimate for EBIT growth, because of lacking data. It turns to be not yet known in relation to similar stocks.
• Profit before income tax growth was not estimated, on insufficient history. It was impossible to measure against rivals.
• Net income growth could not be estimated, and so it is unknown against peer companies.
• There was not enough input data to estimate EPS trend. It's been an impossibility to compare it with industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 9.0

• AFCG managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. 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: 7.0

• AFC Gamma, Inc. usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
• The company normally gets sufficient 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 quite good. It ranks below average when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got good 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 7.2

• AFCG usually uses almost no genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is non-significant. It stands below average when measured against rival firms.
• The relationship between capital expenditures and depreciation is not known, because of not enough inputs, which is a big question mark in relation to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid outstanding dividends, considering the current stock price. It came top-notch against competitors.
• Has significantly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects probably have improved. The company has behaved a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and should be reasonable safe. Sustainability looks top-notch against 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 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 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: 7.4

• AFC Gamma, 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 triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains somewhat better than rival firms.
• Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks great 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 well ranked against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes close to one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be well ranked against peers.
• On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks great 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 excellent in relation 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 earnings have usually been reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks similar to comparable enterprises.
• Fixed assets turnover remains undisclosed. It looks we cannot relate it 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 mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.9

• AFC Gamma, Inc. looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be great 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 excellent in relation to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated extraordinary free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most similar companies.
• The company usually generates plenty 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 looks to be very attractive. It's still great 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 in a very weak position compared to peer ventures.
• The company has neither net debt nor net cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks somewhat better than 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 top tier when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks rather normal in relation 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 better than most peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation to industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extreme earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be significantly undervalued. It's still in good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 8.1

---

Awarener score: 7.4

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!