Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (BAH)

Awarener score: 7.1

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 (Good), the business stability (Superb) and growth (Modest), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very good).

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: 7.5

  • Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation business trend is extremely stable, which is best. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 6.8

  • BAH profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very good. They stand mediocre against 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 hardly sufficient. They remain lacking 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 good considering total sales, and remain almost average when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands almost average when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 4.4

  • Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a low pace. It's been lacking 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 weak 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 in a weak position compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a very low speed. It was somewhat worse than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been very low, and weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a low rhythm in past years. It's been in a weak position compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 7.0

  • BAH had hardly to pay 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: 9.8

  • Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets huge proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks top tier when measured 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.5

  • BAH usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is rather normal. It stands more than average in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping its operating capabilities up to date, which is encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid run-of-the-mill dividends, considering the current stock price. It came better than most competitors.
  • Has increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved in good shape compared to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and shouldn't be at risk. Sustainability looks somewhat better than 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 impressive in relation to rivals.
  • The company uses a significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn sour. It still looks substantially worse when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.9

  • Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a huge portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
  • A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat 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 lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly worse than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks similar to 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 rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands slightly 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 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 in good shape 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 top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.1

  • Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation looks very expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be below 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 worse 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 more than average in relation to 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.
  • The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks somewhat worse 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 similar to 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 rather normal in relation to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is extremely high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains worse than most 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 below average 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 good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.6


BAH logos

Company at a glance: Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation (BAH)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Consulting Services

Market Cap: 14.05 billions

Revenues TTM: 8.82 billions

Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation provides management and technology consulting, analytics, engineering, digital solutions, mission operations, and cyber services to governments, corporations, and not-for-profit organizations in the United States and internationally. The company offers consulting solutions for various domains, business strategies, human capital, and operations. It also provides analytics services, which focuses on delivering transformational solutions in the areas of artificial intelligence, such as machine learning and deep learning; data science, such as data engineering and predictive modeling; automation and decision analytics; and quantum computing. In addition, the company designs, develops, and implements solutions built on contemporary methodologies and modern architectures; delivers engineering services and solutions to define, develop, implement, sustain, and modernize complex physical systems; and provides cyber risk management solutions, such as prevention, detection, and cost effectiveness. Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation was founded in 1914 and is headquartered in McLean, Virginia.

Awarener score: 7.1

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 (Good), the business stability (Superb) and growth (Modest), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very good).