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

---

Fundamental analysis: Ames National Corporation (ATLO)

Awarener score: 6.4

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: 6.0

• Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
• Ames National Corporation business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 8.7

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

Growth score: 4.6

• Ames National Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been a slight improvement compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very good step, which has been somewhat worse than comparable firms.
• Profits growth -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been almost stagnant, which compares weak when measured against peer enterprises.
• Growth on earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been almost stagnant. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, growth on profits -before income taxes- was almost stagnant. It was mediocre against rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been almost null, and weak when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have been almost stagnant in past years. It's been in a weak position compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 6.0

• ATLO had to pay sparse income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better than 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: 6.8

• Ames National Corporation usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
• There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks similar to competitors.
• In the past, got barely sufficient 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: 4.9

• ATLO 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 investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid excellent dividends, considering the current stock price. It came better than most competitors.
• In recent years, has cut back dividend payments. It could be traversing challenging times. The company has behaved in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• The company generates very few genuine funds. Dividend payments are usually on borrowed money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, future payments could be at risk. Sustainability looks bottom tier against comparable companies.
• The company usually neither enlarges nor reduces the pool of investors, resulting in approximately the same mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a slight improvement 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 lacking 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: 6.0

• Ames National Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Current ratio remains a mystery, as there was not sufficient Balance Sheet information. It turns to be unidentifiable against similar firms.
• Very few resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is very solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains somewhat better than rival firms.
• Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks top tier when measured against rivals.
• Quick ratio is unavailable at this moment, due to lacking data. It's a pity we cannot compare it with peer firms.
• A conclusion on cash ratio could not be reached, as we lack inputs, which is unfortunate when trying to measure against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against 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.
• Company earns net interest income on its investments and therefore is in a quite comfortable financial position. It stands top-notch against rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are modest 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.6

• Ames National Corporation has an unknown adjusted Price-to-Earnings ratio, so we cannot comment on that. It happens to be a necessary comparison 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 close to average when compared to peers.
• There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
• Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up in good shape compared to peer ventures.
• We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks below average 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 close to average when compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat worse than peer firms.
• We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
• An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 6.2

---

Awarener score: 6.4

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!