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

---

Fundamental analysis: Ameresco, Inc. (AMRC)

Awarener score: 5.4

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: 8.0

• Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
• Ameresco, Inc. business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 5.2

• AMRC profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually extremely poor. They stand somewhat better than rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be sufficient. It's great when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually hardly sufficient. 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 well ranked against similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually sufficient considering total sales, and remain great when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be sufficient when confronted to sales. Company stands great when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 6.0

• Ameresco, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a low pace. It's been rather normal in relation to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a low step, which has been somewhat worse than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a normal pace, which compares almost average 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 a slight improvement compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a good speed. It was slightly better than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been average, and below average when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a normal rhythm in past years. It's been lacking compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 9.0

• AMRC managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. 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: 6.2

• Ameresco, Inc. usually gets sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.0

• AMRC 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 below average when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually heavily investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is top tier 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 somewhat enlarges 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 in a very weak position compared to rivals.
• We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.9

• Ameresco, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be more than average in relation to 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 very weak position 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.
• Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks similar to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has 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 few cents of cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately only a couple of weekly sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a slight improvement compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
• On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks top tier when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers roughly three months before charging its customers, so there's sufficient money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• Usual business earnings are mostly consumed by net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but stockholders not so much. Profitability must increase, lest the firm risks only working for creditors' benefit. It stands worse than most rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been very low when measured against loans taken. Even significantly cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than ten years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks weak 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 bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.5

• Ameresco, Inc. 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands worse than most similar companies.
• The company usually consumes more funds than can genuinely generate. Business needs are meet by borrowing money or consuming preexistent cash, which can only keep up until a certain limit. Unless the company is driving business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still substantially worse when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. It came up close to average when compared to peer ventures.
• The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks mediocre 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 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 in a very 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 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 mediocre earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.0

---

Awarener score: 5.4

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!