Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (ANF)

Awarener score: 7.2

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 (Very good), the business stability (Very good) and growth (Poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).

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: 5.5

  • Business has been shrinking. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Abercrombie & Fitch Co. business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks top-notch against rivals.

Margins score: 5.8

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

Growth score: 2.4

  • Abercrombie & Fitch Co. profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been in a weak position 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.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an excellent pace, which compares great 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: 2.0

  • ANF had to pay too much 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: 6.5

  • Abercrombie & Fitch Co. usually gets good 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 in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks below average when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.6

  • ANF 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 below average when measured against 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.
  • In recent years, has greatly cut back dividend payments. It could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved in a weak position 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 reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in good shape 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 excellent in relation to rivals.
  • The company uses somewhat more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so some part of them is paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business somewhat improves, or rewards will probably not be sustained at this pace. It still looks weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.3

  • Abercrombie & Fitch Co. has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier when measured against 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 lacking 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 somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than six months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat worse than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks more than average in relation to 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 weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands worse than most 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 almost average 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 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 slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.8

  • Abercrombie & Fitch Co. looks very expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be encouraging 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 in good shape compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated some free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly better than similar companies.
  • The company usually generates 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, at the current price the share might be interesting. It's still similar to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up in good shape 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 worse than most similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks more than average in relation to 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 excellent in relation to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains well ranked against 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 good 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: 4.9


ANF logos

Company at a glance: Abercrombie & Fitch Co. (ANF)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Apparel Retail

Market Cap: 0.79 billions

Revenues TTM: 3.68 billions

Abercrombie & Fitch Co., through its subsidiaries, operates as a specialty retailer. The company operates in two segments, Hollister and Abercrombie. It offers an assortment of apparel, personal care products, and accessories for men, women, and children under the Hollister, Abercrombie & Fitch, abercrombie kids, Moose, Seagull, Gilly Hicks, and Social Tourist brands. As of January 29, 2022, it operated approximately 729 retail stores in Europe, Asia, Canada, the Middle East, United States, and internationally. The company sells products through its stores; various third-party wholesale, franchise, and licensing arrangements; and e-commerce platforms. Abercrombie & Fitch Co. was founded in 1892 and is headquartered in New Albany, Ohio.

Awarener score: 7.2

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 (Very good), the business stability (Very good) and growth (Poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).