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

---

Fundamental analysis: Arcturus Therapeutics Holdings Inc. (ARCT)

Awarener score: 3.7

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: 5.0

• Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Arcturus Therapeutics Holdings Inc. business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 1.3

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

Growth score: 1.1

• Arcturus Therapeutics 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: 2.0

• ARCT 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 a very large portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
• The company hardly grows despite of research and development efforts. It stands rather normal in relation to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.0

• Arcturus Therapeutics Holdings Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets very poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain close to average when compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually insufficient. It ranks below average 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.0

• ARCT 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 encouraging in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is encouraging in relation to 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 close to average when 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

• Arcturus Therapeutics 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 more than enough short-term resources to face short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are non-significant. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar firms.
• A significant part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have almost as many claims on the company as shareholders. It remains worse than most rival firms.
• A substantial portion of resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is better for liquidity. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has abundant dollars in 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 more than enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
• Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
• We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
• Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
• Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against 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.
• Last twelve months revenues were non-significant in relation to fixed assets. The company must improve income to take advantage of used resources. It looks a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still well ranked against peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.0

• Arcturus Therapeutics 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 lacking 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 somewhat 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 almost average when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has 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 somewhat more stockholders. It came up in good shape compared to peer ventures.
• This company is a cash hoarder. It might be well poised to substantially 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 huge relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks close to average when 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 somewhat worse than peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a lot of money. 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 very low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is in dispute. It's still rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 2.9

---

Awarener score: 3.7

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!