Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc. (AMEH)

Awarener score: 5.9

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 (Very good), 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 growing at a very good pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
  • Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks mediocre against rivals.

Margins score: 6.5

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

Growth score: 7.7

  • Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very good step, which has been well ranked against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an excellent pace, which compares more than average in relation to peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at an extremely fast tempo. It turns to be impressive in relation to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an extremely fast speed. It was better than most rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been extremely high, and top tier 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: 3.0

  • AMEH had to pay a lot of 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: 8.5

  • Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc. usually gets excellent 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.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got excellent 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: 3.6

  • AMEH usually uses a significant portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is abundant. 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 very little dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
  • In recent years, has slightly cut back dividend payments. The company has behaved in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
  • The company usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to pay dividends. There could be some concerns on sustainability if business takes a dive. Sustainability looks worse than most comparable companies.
  • The company has significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, 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 close to average when compared to rivals.
  • The company uses a large portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn sour. It still looks weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.4

  • Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be similar to peer companies.
  • The company has roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be excellent in relation to similar firms.
  • Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains somewhat better than 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 encouraging 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 good shape compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and equivalents, which is better than most similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks more than average in relation to peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes close to one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be well ranked against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month from the purchase. It ranks almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers less than one month before charging its customers, so there's little money invested in working capital. It's rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are easily bearable. It stands well ranked against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been quite good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take around three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is excellent 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: 5.4

  • Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc. looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation to 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 lacking compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated some slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat better than similar companies.
  • The company usually generates somewhat 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 reasonable. It's still similar 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 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 well ranked against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is high. Substantial improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is somewhat risky. It ranks similar to peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a more than one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a weak position compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is significantly high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be more than average 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: 5.9


AMEH logos

Company at a glance: Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc. (AMEH)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Medical Care Facilities

Market Cap: 1.58 billions

Revenues TTM: 1.04 billions

Apollo Medical Holdings, Inc., a physician-centric technology-powered healthcare company, provides medical care services. The company is leveraging its proprietary population health management and healthcare delivery platform, operates an integrated, value-based healthcare model which empowers the providers in its network to deliver care to its patients. It offers care coordination services to patients, families, primary care physicians, specialists, acute care hospitals, alternative sites of inpatient care, physician groups, and health plans. The company's physician network consists of primary care physicians, specialist physicians, and hospitalists. It serves patients, primarily covered by private or public insurance, such as Medicare, Medicaid, and health maintenance organization plans; and non-insured patients in California. The company was founded in 1994 and is headquartered in Alhambra, California.

Awarener score: 5.9

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