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

---

Fundamental analysis: Alerus Financial Corporation (ALRS)

Awarener score: 4.0

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: 5.0

• Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
• Alerus Financial Corporation business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 7.8

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

Growth score: 6.6

• Alerus Financial Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been a slight improvement compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at an excellent step, which has been slightly worse than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a normal pace, which compares encouraging in relation to peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a normal tempo. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a normal speed. It was somewhat better than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been average, and encouraging in relation to 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: 4.0

• ALRS had to pay substantial income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse than 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

• Alerus Financial Corporation usually gets sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
• There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks great when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 2.9

• ALRS 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 more than average in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing part of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping some funds for something else. It can't keep forever, which is substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid good dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly better than competitors.
• Dividend payments have been more or less stable in recent years. The company has behaved lacking compared to similar firms.
• The company generates very few genuine funds. Dividend payments are usually on borrowed money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, future payments could be at risk. Sustainability looks bottom tier against 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 very 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 a disappointment compared to rivals.
• The company generates very few genuine funds. Investor rewards must be paid burning existing cash or by borrowing money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, stockholder compensation could be at risk. It still looks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.5

• Alerus Financial Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some 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 roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• A very minor portion of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains worse than most rival firms.
• Most 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 more than enough dollars in 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 enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
• Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
• We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
• Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
• Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against similar companies.
• Company earns net interest income on its investments and therefore is in a quite comfortable financial position. It stands top-notch 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.
• 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 impressive in relation to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.4

• Alerus Financial Corporation has an unknown adjusted Price-to-Earnings ratio, so we cannot comment on that. It happens to be a necessary comparison 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 close to average when compared 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.
• 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 very weak position compared to peer ventures.
• We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be attractive. It ranks below average when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a roughly two to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks excellent in relation to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be more than reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains slightly worse than peer firms.
• We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
• An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 5.8

---

Awarener score: 4.0

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!