Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: The AZEK Company Inc. (AZEK)

Awarener score: 5.6

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 (unknown) and growth (unknown), 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: a result could not be reached

  • Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
  • The AZEK Company Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 5.7

  • AZEK profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually hardly sufficient. They stand well ranked against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be good. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually sufficient. They remain a slight improvement compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be sufficient in relation to total revenues. They're still slightly worse than similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually hardly sufficient considering total sales, and remain substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be hardly sufficient when confronted to sales. Company stands substantially worse when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

  • The AZEK Company Inc. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
  • There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown against comparable firms.
  • EBITDA growth is unknown due to insufficient inputs, which compares unknown against peer enterprises.
  • We were not able to provide an estimate for EBIT growth, because of lacking data. It turns to be not yet known in relation 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

  • AZEK had to pay too much income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been worse 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: 5.8

  • The AZEK Company Inc. usually gets sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually modest. It ranks substantially worse 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.5

  • AZEK usually uses a very large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is heavy. It stands substantially worse when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually somewhat 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 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 significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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 close to average when 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: 4.7

  • The AZEK Company Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be significant 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 more than enough short-term resources to face short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are non-significant. It turns to be in good shape compared 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 last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has 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 almost another of cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
  • Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a disappointment compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks weak when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers four months or more before charging its customers, so there's significant money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a significant portion of usual business earnings, but are mostly bearable. It stands somewhat worse than 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.
  • Revenues are somewhat 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 in a weak position 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 bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.2

  • The AZEK Company Inc. looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be weak 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 in a weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated some free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands worse than most similar companies.
  • The company usually generates somewhat 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 reasonable. It's still substantially worse when measured against 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 a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks somewhat better than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is high. Substantial improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is somewhat risky. It ranks weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a roughly two to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a weak position compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is somewhat high. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains slightly better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned little 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 mediocre 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: 4.1


AZEK logos

Company at a glance: The AZEK Company Inc. (AZEK)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Building Products & Equipment

Market Cap: 2.49 billions

Revenues TTM: 1.40 billions

The AZEK Company Inc. engages in designing, manufacturing, and selling building products for residential, commercial, and industrial markets in the United States. It operates through two segments: Residential and Commercial. The Residential segment designs and manufactures engineered outdoor living products, which includes decking, railing, trim and moulding, and accessories under the TimberTech, AZEK Exteriors, VERSATEX, and ULTRALOX brand name. Its Commercial segment manufactures engineered polymer materials that is used in various industries, which includes outdoor, graphic displays and signage, educational, and recreational markets, as well as the food processing and chemical industries. This segment also offers bathroom partitions, shower and dressing stalls, lockers, and other storage solutions under the Aria, Eclipse, Hiny Hiders, TuffTec, and Duralife brand name to schools, parks, stadium arenas, industrial plants, and retail, recreational, and commercial facilities. The company was formerly known as CPG Newco LLC and changed its name to The AZEK Company Inc. in June 2020. The AZEK Company Inc. was incorporated in 2013 and is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.

Awarener score: 5.6

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 (unknown) and growth (unknown), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Average).