Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. (APRN)

Awarener score: 1.5

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 (Bottom), the business stability (Average) and growth (Bottom), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Bottom).

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: 3.5

  • Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 3.5

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

Growth score: 1.1

  • Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very 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.
  • 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: 1.0

  • APRN had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier 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: 1.5

  • Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets extremely poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually bottom profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got very poor 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

  • APRN 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 sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is weak 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 heavily 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 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: 5.8

  • Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. 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 lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some liquidity concerns. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a tenth of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have minor claims on the company, and financial position is safe. It remains worse than most rival firms.
  • Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks below average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks similar to peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a slight improvement compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks below average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers almost when charging its customers, so there's very little money invested in working capital. It's rather normal in relation 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 reasonable 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 huge considering yearly sales, which is great. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.7

  • Blue Apron Holdings, 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 slight improvement compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed lots of funds. Either it reinvested heavily in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands bottom tier against similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes plenty 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 outstanding 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 greatly 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 plenty more stockholders. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • The company has substantial more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. 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 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 more than reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty of 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 an extremely low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is significantly in dispute. It's still a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 2.7


APRN logos

Company at a glance: Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. (APRN)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Internet Retail

Market Cap: 0.03 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.46 billions

Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. operates a direct-to-consumer platform that delivers original recipes with fresh and seasonal ingredients. It also operates Blue Apron Market, an e-commerce market that provides cooking tools, utensils, pantry items, and other products. In addition, the company offers Blue Apron Wine, a direct-to-consumer wine delivery service that sells wines, which can be paired with its meals. It serves young couples, families, singles, and empty nesters. The company offers its services through order selections on Website or mobile application primarily in the United States. Blue Apron Holdings, Inc. was founded in 2012 and is headquartered in New York, New York.

Awarener score: 1.5

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 (Bottom), the business stability (Average) and growth (Bottom), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Bottom).