Fundamental analysis: Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX)

Awarener score: 3.4

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 (Poor), the business stability (Modest) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).

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: 4.5

Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
Aemetis, Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 3.0

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

Growth score: 1.0

Aemetis, Inc. couldn't always profit -on goods and services sold- in the past years. It's been a disappointment compared to competitors.
In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
In past years, the company couldn't always turn a profit -available to repay debt and purchase properties-, which compares last-in-rank when measured against peer enterprises.
In the previous years, the firm couldn't always make a profit -before income taxes and interests on loans taken-. It turns to be a disappointment compared 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: 7.0

AMTX had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
Research and development expenses hardly consume a portion of revenues. It's last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
The company shows excellent business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a disappointment compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.5

Aemetis, Inc. usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against 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 low 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 1.6

AMTX 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 last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
The company is usually not replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank 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 has significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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: 4.6

Aemetis, 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 lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might be liquidity concerns. It turns to be a disappointment 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.
Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment 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 great when measured against peers.
Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as lacking compared to competitors.
On average, it takes close to one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly better than peers.
Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank 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 in a weak position compared to similar companies.
Has usually been losing money on the business, so net interest expenses must be paid by increasing borrowings, which is unsustainable in the long run. The situation is very risky for both creditors and shareholders, profitability must increase. It stands bottom tier against rival firms.
Business has usually been operated at a loss. Unless prospects improve, the company is no position to decrease loans taken levels but by additional shareholders' funding. Profitability must improve. It ranks last-in-rank 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 very good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.5

Aemetis, 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 consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands bottom tier against 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 last-in-rank when measured 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 a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks worse than most 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 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 very weak position compared 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 significant money. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.5

Company at a glance: Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX)

Sector, industry: Energy, Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing

Market Cap: 0.18 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.21 billions

Aemetis, Inc. operates as a renewable natural gas and renewable fuels company in North America and India. It operates through three segments: California Ethanol, Dairy Renewable Natural Gas, and India Biodiesel. The company focuses on the acquisition, development, and commercialization of negative carbon intensity products and technologies that replace traditional petroleum-based products. It sells biodiesel primarily to government oil marketing companies, transport companies, resellers, distributors, and private refiners through its own sales force and independent sales agents, as well as to brokers who resell the product to end-users. The company also produces and sells ethanol; and wet distillers grains, distillers corn oil, and condensed distillers solubles to dairies and feedlots as animal feed. In addition, it produces dairy biogas; produces and sells high-grade alcohol and various feed products, as well as hand sanitizers; and researches and develops conversion technologies using waste feedstocks to produce biofuels and biochemicals. The company was formerly known as AE Biofuels, Inc. and changed its name to Aemetis, Inc. in November 2011. Aemetis, Inc. was founded in 2005 and is headquartered in Cupertino, California.