Fundamental analysis: AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. (AGRI)

Awarener score: 1.3

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

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.
AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: we could not reach a conclusion

AGRI usual gross margins were not estimated, due to lack of enough history. They stand unknown against rival companies.
We would not risk estimating the normal operating margins, because of insufficient past records. It's unidentified in relation to competitors.
Normal EBITDA margins remain unknown, due to not enough track records. They remain unknown against peers.
EBIT normal margins could not be estimated, due to not sufficient input years. They're still undisclosed compared to similar companies.
Usual profit margin before income taxes is still unknown, as there is not enough history to analyze, and remain therefore an impossibility to compare with rivals.
Due to insufficient past records, we were unable to estimate normal net profit margin. Company stands unidentified in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. couldn't always profit -on goods and services sold- in the past years. It's been a disappointment 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: 1.0

AGRI had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against 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: 1.0

AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. usually gets pauper returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
The company normally gets extremely poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment compared to similar companies.
There's usually bottom profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
In the past, got pauper 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.4

AGRI 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 last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
The company is usually heavily 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.
Has stopped or virtually stopped paying dividends. Unless they were a special one-shot payment, the company could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved a disappointment 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 significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a weak position compared 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: 3.5

AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very large 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 substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
The company has lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might be liquidity concerns. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar firms.
Roughly a third of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have claims on the company. It remains mediocre against 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 less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a very weak position compared to peer firms.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
Days of sales outstanding are not known, out of lack of data. It still ranks unknown against peers.
Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
On average pays suppliers many months after the purchase. It ranks top tier when measured against industry peers.
Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against similar companies.
Has usually been losing money on the business, so net interest expenses must be paid by increasing borrowings, which is unsustainable in the long run. The situation is very risky for both creditors and shareholders, profitability must increase. It stands bottom tier 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.
The company didn't have revenues in the past twelve months. It must start having income to take advantage of used resources. It looks a disappointment compared to similar firms.
The firm has yet to start reporting any sales. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.1

AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. 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 consumed lots of funds. Either it reinvested heavily in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands bottom tier against 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 last-in-rank when measured against industry firms.
In the past twelve months, the company has largely 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 a lot more stockholders. It came up in a very weak position compared to peer ventures.
The company is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. 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.
Price-to-Sales ratio is currently an incognita. It looks incomparable with 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 somewhat better than peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty of money. It happens to be last-in-rank 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 a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 2.0

Company at a glance: AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. (AGRI)

Sector, industry: Consumer Defensive, Farm Products

Market Cap: 0.01 billions

Revenues TTM: unavailable

AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd., an agriculture-focused technology company, focuses on the development and commercialization of plant-based ingredients and products for businesses and consumers that deliver healthier and nutritious solutions. It also engages in the real estate holding and development activities; provision of management advisory services; and intellectual property development activities. The company was formerly known as Canivate Growing Systems Ltd. and changed its name to AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. in November 2019. AgriFORCE Growing Systems Ltd. was incorporated in 2017 and is headquartered in Vancouver, Canada.