Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Adecoagro S.A. (AGRO)

Awarener score: 6.1

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 (Modest), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very good).

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: 5.0

  • Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Adecoagro S.A. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 6.5

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

Growth score: 2.6

  • Adecoagro S.A. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a good pace. It's been a slight improvement compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a normal step, which has been somewhat worse than 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: 2.0

  • AGRO had to pay too much income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been worse 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: 5.0

  • Adecoagro S.A. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually modest. It ranks similar to competitors.
  • In the past, got barely sufficient 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: 5.8

  • AGRO usually uses a very large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is heavy. It stands below average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually somewhat investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is weak when measured against 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 usually reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in good shape 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 excellent in relation to rivals.
  • The company uses a modest portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained. It still looks weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 3.9

  • Adecoagro S.A. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is mostly safe. It happens to be similar to peer companies.
  • The company has roughly double short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are normally not an issue. It turns to be close to average when compared to similar firms.
  • A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and short-term receivables. It's close to average when 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.
  • Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
  • Normally has more than six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a disappointment compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes plenty of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks similar to industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers plenty of months before charging its customers, so there's a lot of money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Usual business earnings barely cover net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but hardly shareholders. Situation is risky, profitability must increase, or additional stockholders' funding will eventually be required. It stands mediocre 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.
  • 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 in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is slightly low when yearly sales are considered, business volume should be increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.5

  • Adecoagro S.A. looks reasonable in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be below average 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 slight improvement compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands top-notch against similar companies.
  • The company usually generates reasonably more than enough 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, the current valuation might be fair. It's still more than average in relation to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has slightly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up rather normal 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 looks extremely cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be very hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, a weak financial position, or that earnings aren't representative. If that isn't the case, the stock price could be extremely attractive. It ranks more than average in relation to 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 close to average when compared 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 somewhat better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned great money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be top tier when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a mediocre earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 4.8


AGRO logos

Company at a glance: Adecoagro S.A. (AGRO)

Sector, industry: Consumer Defensive, Farm Products

Market Cap: 0.93 billions

Revenues TTM: 1.16 billions

Adecoagro S.A. operates as an agro-industrial company in South America. It engages in farming crops and other agricultural products, dairy operations, and land transformation activities, as well as sugar, ethanol, and energy production activities. The company is involved in the planting, harvesting, and sale of grains and oilseeds, as well as wheat, corn, soybeans, peanuts, cotton, sunflowers, and others; provision of grain warehousing/conditioning, handling, and drying services to third parties; and purchase and sale of crops produced by third parties. It also plants, harvests, processes, and markets rice; and produces and sells raw milk, UHT, cheese, powder milk, and others. In addition, the company engages in the cultivating, processing, and transforming of sugarcane into ethanol and sugar; and the sale of electricity cogenerated at its sugar and ethanol mills to the grid. Further, it is involved in the identification and acquisition of underdeveloped and undermanaged farmland, and the realization of value through the strategic disposition of assets. As of December 31, 2021, the company owned a total of 219,850 hectares of land, including 18 farms in Argentina, 8 farms in Brazil, and 1 farm in Uruguay, as well as a total of 241 megawatts of installed cogeneration capacity. Adecoagro S.A. was founded in 2002 and is based in Luxembourg, Luxembourg.

Awarener score: 6.1

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 (Modest), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very good).