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

---

Fundamental analysis: Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. (ASPS)

Awarener score: 3.3

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: 3.5

• Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
• Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 3.7

• ASPS profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually extremely poor. They stand mediocre against rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be meagre. 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be meagre in relation to total revenues. They're still somewhat worse than similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually meagre 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: 1.4

• Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been lacking 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

• ASPS 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: 4.0

• Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average 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 low 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.0

• ASPS 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 weak when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually not replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank 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 usually reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent in relation 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 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: 6.4

• Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. 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 roughly double short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are normally not an issue. It turns to be close to average when 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 bottom tier against rival firms.
• Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks below average when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's close to average when compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes close to one month 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 great when measured against 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 excellent in relation to similar companies.
• Usual business earnings barely cover net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but hardly shareholders. Situation is risky, profitability must increase, or additional stockholders' funding will eventually be required. It stands worse than most rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been low when measured against loans taken. Even cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than seven years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are excellent in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. Low property, plant, and equipment requirements, allows the company to keep more money to reward stockholders in the long run. It looks close to average when 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 slightly worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.7

• Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. 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 consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
• In the past years the company hardly generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve enough to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still below average when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. 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 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 not far from one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks close to average when 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 significant 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 very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.2

---

Awarener score: 3.3

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!