Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (AJG)

Awarener score: 5.8

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 (Excellent) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).

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: 6.5

  • Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 7.2

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

Growth score: 6.1

  • Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a good pace. It's been rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a good step, which has been somewhat better than comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a normal pace, which compares great when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a good tempo. It turns to be in good shape compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a good speed. It was somewhat better than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been low, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a very low rhythm in past years. It's been lacking compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 10.0

  • AJG managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been top-notch 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: 7.2

  • Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.0

  • AJG usually uses a sparse portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is modest. It stands weak when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat worse than competitors.
  • In recent years, has slightly cut back dividend payments. The company has behaved lacking 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 usually enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a 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: 5.5

  • Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. 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 below average when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has somewhat lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some liquidity concerns. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Very few resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is very solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains slightly better than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents 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 extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less than one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks great when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers almost when charging its customers, so there's very little money invested in working capital. It's excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands mediocre against 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 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 low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.5

  • Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. looks very expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be weak 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 generated some slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands well ranked 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 encouraging in relation to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has 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 somewhat 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 worse than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is very high. A lot of improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is risky. It ranks below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a very weak position compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains somewhat worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned little money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a modest earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.5


AJG logos

Company at a glance: Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. (AJG)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Insurance Brokers

Market Cap: 41.12 billions

Revenues TTM: 8.48 billions

Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., together with its subsidiaries, provides insurance brokerage, consulting, third-party claims settlement, and administration services in the United States, Australia, Bermuda, Canada, the Caribbean, New Zealand, India, and the United Kingdom. It operates through Brokerage and Risk Management segments. The Brokerage segment consists of retail and wholesale insurance brokerage operations; assists retail brokers and other non-affiliated brokers in the placement of specialized and hard-to-place insurance; acts as a brokerage wholesaler, managing general agent, and managing general underwriter for distributing specialized insurance coverage's to underwriting enterprises. This segment also performs activities, including marketing, underwriting, issuing policies, collecting premiums, appointing and supervising other agents, paying claims, and negotiating reinsurance; and offers brokerage and consulting services to businesses and organizations, including commercial, not-for-profit, and public entities, as well as individuals in the areas of insurance placement, risk of loss management, and management of employer sponsored benefit programs. The Risk Management segment provides contract claim settlement and administration services to enterprises and public entities; and claims management, loss control consulting, and insurance property appraisal services. The company offers its services through a network of correspondent insurance brokers and consultants. It serves commercial, industrial, public, religious, and not-for-profit entities. The company was incorporated in 1927 and is headquartered in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.

Awarener score: 5.8

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 (Excellent) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).