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

---

Fundamental analysis: AutoZone, Inc. (AZO)

Awarener score: 7.2

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: 7.0

• Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
• AutoZone, Inc. business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 8.0

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

Growth score: 5.3

• AutoZone, Inc. 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 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 below average when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a slow tempo. It turns to be lacking compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a low speed. It was slightly worse than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been low, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a good rhythm in past years. It's been close to average when compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 4.0

• AZO had to pay substantial income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly worse 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: 10.0

• AutoZone, Inc. usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves great 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 huge 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.5

• AZO usually uses a sparse portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is modest. It stands great when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is encouraging 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 usually significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive 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 excellent in relation to rivals.
• The company uses somewhat more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so some part of them is paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business somewhat improves, or rewards will probably not be sustained at this pace. It still looks weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.1

• AutoZone, Inc. 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 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 a disappointment 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 mediocre against rival firms.
• Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks almost average when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a disappointment compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
• On average pays suppliers many months after the purchase. It ranks top tier 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 impressive in relation to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are easily bearable. It stands slightly better than rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been quite good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take around three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks similar to 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 disappointment compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is excellent when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.3

• AutoZone, Inc. looks somewhat 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat better than 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 almost average when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up rather normal in relation 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 somewhat high. Improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which presents some risks. 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 in a very weak position 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 earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be similar to 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 rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.4

---

Awarener score: 7.2

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!