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

---

Fundamental analysis: Banc of California, Inc. (BANC)

Awarener score: 6.5

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: 3.0

• Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
• Banc of California, Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 8.7

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

Growth score: 6.6

• Banc of California, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been rather normal in relation to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at an excellent step, which has been slightly worse than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very 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 slow tempo. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an extremely fast speed. It was top-notch against rivals.
• In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been excellent, and top tier 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: 4.0

• BANC had to pay substantial income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been mediocre against 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

• Banc of California, Inc. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse when measured against 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.6

• BANC usually uses a slight portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is light. 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 top tier when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid run-of-the-mill dividends, considering the current stock price. It came mediocre against competitors.
• In recent years, has greatly cut back dividend payments. It could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved a disappointment compared to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a slight portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks slightly better than 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 close to average when compared to rivals.
• The company uses a low portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can most likely be sustained. It still looks below average when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.6

• Banc of California, Inc. 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.
• The company has plenty short-term resources to face short-term obligations. There're no liquidity concerns. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• Roughly a tenth of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have minor claims on the company, and financial position is safe. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
• Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has plenty of dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has plenty of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks more than average in relation to 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 very low when measured against loans taken. Even significantly cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than ten years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks substantially worse when measured against 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.
• Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.9

• Banc of California, Inc. looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be similar to 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 good shape compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
• The company usually generates plenty more 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, at the current price the share looks to be very attractive. It's still great 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 very weak position compared to peer ventures.
• The company has neither net debt nor net cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks slightly worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be attractive. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 lacking compared to rival firms.
• The stock price is at or below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is really low, the stock may be selling a t a discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains well ranked against peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge 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 an extreme earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be significantly undervalued. It's still rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.1

---

Awarener score: 6.5

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!