Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Ark Restaurants Corp. (ARKR)

Awarener score: 5.8

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

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: 4.0

  • Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
  • Ark Restaurants Corp. business varies, ups and downs are rather normal. Risk is sufficient. It looks bottom tier against rivals.

Margins score: 6.0

  • ARKR profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very good. They stand better than most 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 lacking 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 sufficient when confronted to sales. Company stands almost average when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.7

  • Ark Restaurants Corp. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. 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.
  • 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 great when measured against peer companies.
  • The company lost money at least once in the past years. It's been excellent in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 10.0

  • ARKR managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been better 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

  • Ark Restaurants Corp. usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient 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 quite good. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.3

  • ARKR usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is large. It stands almost 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 almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid low dividends, considering the current stock price. 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 a disappointment 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 barely enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in slightly more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains close to average when compared to peer enterprises.
  • We are not sure on the effectiveness of the company when repurchasing shares, as there were not enough numbers to crunch. It stands unidentified against rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.4

  • Ark Restaurants Corp. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent some portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be below average 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 rather normal in relation 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 slightly better than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks similar to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's rather normal in relation to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a very weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes close to one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly worse than peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks below average 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 lacking compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands slightly worse than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been very low when measured against loans taken. Even significantly cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than ten years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks below average 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 slight improvement 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 slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.0

  • Ark Restaurants Corp. looks reasonable in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average 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 good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands top-notch against similar companies.
  • The company usually generates reasonably 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, the current valuation might be fair. It's still encouraging in relation to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company hasn't rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up close to average when 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 looks extremely cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be very hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, a weak financial position, or that earnings aren't representative. If that isn't the case, the stock price could be extremely attractive. It ranks top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being 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 better than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned good money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be great when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a modest earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a slight improvement compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.6


ARKR logos

Company at a glance: Ark Restaurants Corp. (ARKR)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Restaurants

Market Cap: 0.06 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.18 billions

Ark Restaurants Corp., through its subsidiaries, owns and operates restaurants and bars in the United States. As of December 20, 2021, it owned and operated 17 restaurants and bars, including four restaurants located in New York City; one in Washington, D.C.; five in Las Vegas, Nevada; one in Atlantic City, New Jersey; four on the east coast of Florida; and two on the gulf coast of Alabama, as well as had 17 fast food concepts and catering operations. The company was incorporated in 1983 and is based in New York, New York.

Awarener score: 5.8

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