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

---

Fundamental analysis: Atmos Energy Corporation (ATO)

Awarener score: 5.2

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: 6.5

• Business has been growing at a low pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
• Atmos Energy Corporation business trend stability is good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 8.8

• ATO 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 excellent. It's great when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually excellent. They remain impressive in relation to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be excellent in relation to total revenues. They're still top-notch against similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually excellent considering total sales, and remain top tier when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be excellent when confronted to sales. Company stands top tier when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 4.4

• Atmos Energy Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a low pace. It's been close to average when compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very low step, which has been somewhat worse than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a low pace, which compares almost average when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a very low tempo. It turns to be lacking compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a very low speed. It was slightly worse than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been low, and encouraging in relation to peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a very low rhythm in past years. It's been close to average when compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 7.0

• ATO had hardly to pay income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat 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

• Atmos Energy Corporation usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks weak when measured against 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.4

• ATO usually uses almost all genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is huge. It stands below average when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually heavily investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
• Dividend payments have been more or less stable in recent years. The company has behaved close to average when 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 enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a weak position 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: 4.8

• Atmos Energy Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is mostly safe. 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 excellent in relation to similar firms.
• Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains well ranked against rival firms.
• Most controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks similar to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's excellent in relation to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month and a half 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 approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat worse than peers.
• Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers roughly one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands better than most rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks similar to 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 disappointment compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.0

• Atmos Energy Corporation looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be almost average 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 impressive in relation 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 worse than most similar companies.
• The company usually consumes 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 business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still substantially worse 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 a weak position compared to peer ventures.
• The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks slightly better than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is somewhat high. Improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which presents some risks. It ranks similar to peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks a disappointment 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 better than most peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. 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 good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in a very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.0

---

Awarener score: 5.2

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!