Fundamental analysis: Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. (AQST)

Awarener score: 2.2

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 poor), the business stability (Very good) 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: 4.5

Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 3.2

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

Growth score: 1.1

Aquestive Therapeutics, 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: 2.3

AQST 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 consume quite a bit of revenues. It's below average when measured against competitors.
Business has been shrinking, despite research and development efforts. It stands in a very weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.0

Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. usually gets pauper 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 pauper 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: 1.8

AQST 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 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.
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 greatly 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: 4.9

Aquestive Therapeutics, 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 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 somewhat worse than rival firms.
Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks encouraging in relation to rivals.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a weak position compared to peer firms.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
Normally has approximately five months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as close to average when compared to competitors.
On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly better than peers.
On average pays suppliers many months after the purchase. It ranks more than average in relation to industry peers.
The company charges its customers before it must pay its suppliers, so the more it sales, the more free funds it gets. It's in good shape 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 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
Resource exploitation is quite good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still well ranked against peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.4

Aquestive Therapeutics, 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 neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could get, it reinvested in the business, which stands slightly worse than similar companies.
The company usually consumes much 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 significant business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still below average 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 more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks slightly better than 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 high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks lacking 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 a lot of money. It happens to be weak when measured against industry peers.
In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a very low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is in dispute. It's still in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 2.6

Company at a glance: Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. (AQST)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Drug Manufacturers—Specialty & Generic

Market Cap: 0.13 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.05 billions

Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., a pharmaceutical company, focuses on identifying, developing, and commercializing various products to address unmet medical needs in the United States and internationally. The company markets Sympazan, an oral soluble film formulation of clobazam for the treatment of lennox-gastaut syndrome; Suboxone, a sublingual film formulation of buprenorphine and naloxone for the treatment of opioid dependence; Zuplenz, an oral soluble film formulation of ondansetron for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy and post-operative recovery; and Azstarys, a once-daily product for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. The company's proprietary product candidates comprise Libervant, a buccal soluble film formulation of diazepam for the treatment of seizures; and Exservan, an oral soluble film formulation of riluzole for the treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Its proprietary pipeline of complex molecule products include AQST-108, a sublingual film formulation delivering systemic epinephrine for the treatment of conditions other than anaphylaxis; AQST-305, a sublingual film formulation of octreotide for the treatment of acromegaly; and AQST-109, an orally delivered epinephrine product candidate for the emergency treatment of allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. Further, the company develops KYNMOBI, a sublingual film formulation of apomorphine for the treatment of episodic off-periods in Parkinson's disease. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc. was incorporated in 2004 and is headquartered in Warren, New Jersey.