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

---

Fundamental analysis: Akumin Inc. (AKU)

Awarener score: 5.6

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: 6.5

• Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
• Akumin Inc. business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 5.2

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

Growth score: 5.4

• Akumin Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been in good shape compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very good step, which has been better than most comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an excellent pace, which compares top tier when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at an excellent tempo. It turns to be excellent in relation 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

• AKU 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: 7.5

• Akumin Inc. usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
• Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
• Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown against competitors.
• In the past, got very 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.6

• AKU 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 encouraging in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is below average 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 significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains rather normal in relation 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: 4.2

• Akumin Inc. has not disclosed intangibles assets, so we could not reach a meaningful conclusion on this metric. It happens to be a not known variable when measured with peer companies.
• The company has somewhat more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns might not be that important. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar firms.
• Most resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have more claims on the company than shareholders. Unless the company is a financial institution that takes deposits, the situation might be very risky. It remains bottom tier 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 roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes less than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be better than most peers.
• On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks weak when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers roughly one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's a slight improvement 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 worse than most rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been extremely low when measured against loans taken. Even severely cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than twenty years to repay the obligations. Additional stockholders' funding may be a quicker way, but at the cost of increasing the mouths to feed on the eventual pie of profits. It ranks substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are somewhat 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 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 slightly worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.5

• Akumin 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 somewhat better than similar companies.
• In the past years the company barely generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still encouraging in relation to industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has significantly 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 numerous more stockholders. It came up in a weak position compared 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 very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks impressive in relation to rival firms.
• There's no accounting equity, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains bottom tier against peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a little money. It happens to be encouraging in relation to 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 a slight improvement compared to peer companies.

Total score: 4.6

---

Awarener score: 5.6

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!