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

---

Fundamental analysis: Akso Health Group (AHG)

Awarener score: 10.0

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.
• Akso Health Group business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 4.2

• AHG profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually huge. They stand better than most rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be very poor. It's last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually very poor. They remain a disappointment compared to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be very poor in relation to total revenues. They're still bottom tier against similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually very poor considering total sales, and remain last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be very poor when confronted to sales. Company stands last-in-rank when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

• Akso Health Group has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare 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: 7.7

• AHG had to pay sparse income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat better than peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a sparse portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
• The company shows very good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands in a weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.8

• Akso Health Group usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets low proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks last-in-rank 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 10.0

• AHG remains pending of analysis regarding capital expenditures, due to data unavailable. It stands last-in-rank 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.
• There was no available information regarding dividend yield. It came unknown 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 significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive 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: 5.3

• Akso Health Group 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 more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be lacking 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.
• Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in 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 another of cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on many months credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be mediocre against peers.
• Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank 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 in a weak position compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a non-significant portion of usual business earnings, and are therefore extremely easily to bear. It stands better than most rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been excellent when measured against loans taken. It could take less than two years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks great when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are low in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. The more property, plant, and equipment used, the more the company must reinvest to fight obsolescence, which usually means less available funds for the shareholders in the long run. It looks a disappointment compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is reasonable when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.4

• Akso Health Group 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 impressive in relation to peers.
• There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
• Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure against industry firms.
• A conclusion regarding usual company rewards to stockholders was impossible to reach with data available. It came up also not enough to relate to peer ventures.
• This company is sitting in a mountain of cash. It's very well poised to substantially increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks top-notch 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 in good shape 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 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 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 impressive in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 5.5

---

Awarener score: 10.0

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!