Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. (AGFS)

Awarener score: 6.0

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

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: 3.0

  • Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 5.7

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

Growth score: 1.1

  • AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very weak position 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: 3.0

  • AGFS 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 low portion of revenues. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • Business has seen substantial shrinking, despite research and development efforts. It stands a disappointment compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 4.0

  • AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets low proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually lacking. It ranks weak when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got low 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.6

  • AGFS usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is rather normal. It stands weak when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually not replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid outstanding dividends, considering the current stock price. It came well ranked against competitors.
  • In recent years, has cut back dividend payments. It could be traversing challenging times. The company has behaved in good shape compared to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and should be reasonable safe. Sustainability looks somewhat 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 close to average when 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.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.4

  • AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a huge portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major 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 a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a third of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have claims on the company. It remains worse than most rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks last-in-rank 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 good shape compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a very weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks more than average in relation to 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 in a very weak position 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 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are very good in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. Low property, plant, and equipment requirements allows the company to keep more money to reward stockholders in the long run. It looks a slight improvement 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 worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.8

  • AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. 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 a disappointment 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 slightly better 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 top tier when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up excellent in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company is drowned in loans. It almost belongs more to the creditors than the stockholders. The situation may be dire. It looks bottom tier 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 not far from one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks lacking compared to rival firms.
  • The stock price is significantly below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is extremely low, the stock may be selling at a large discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains top-notch against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost significant 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 somewhat low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in a very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.9


AGFS logos

Company at a glance: AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. (AGFS)

Sector, industry: Consumer Defensive, Farm Products

Market Cap: 0.08 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.10 billions

AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. provides science-based solutions, data-driven technologies, and high-touch customer services. The company's flagship product is the SmartFresh system that regulates the post-harvest ripening effects of ethylene to preserve the texture, firmness, taste, and appearance of produce during storage, transportation, and retail display. It also provides Harvista technology for use in near-harvest management of apples, pears, cherries, and blueberries; FreshCloud, a digital technology service platform of produce monitoring and screening solutions; and LandSpring, a 1- methlycycloproprene technology targeted to transplanted vegetable seedlings. In addition, the company offers fungicides, disinfectants, coatings, and packinghouse equipment for the citrus market under the Actiseal, FreshStart, VitaFresh Botanicals, Teycer Originals, and Control-Tec brands. It supports growers, packers, and retailers with solutions across the food supply chain to enhance the shelf life of fresh produce. The company primarily operates in the United States, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, and the Philippines. AgroFresh Solutions, Inc. was founded in 1994 and is headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Awarener score: 6.0

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