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

---

Fundamental analysis: Baxter International Inc. (BAX)

Awarener score: 7.1

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 below average when measured against peer companies.
• Baxter International Inc. business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 6.8

• BAX profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually sufficient. They stand mediocre against rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be very good. It's encouraging in relation to competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually good. They remain rather normal in relation to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be good in relation to total revenues. They're still somewhat better than similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually sufficient considering total sales, and remain similar to rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands similar to comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.6

• Baxter International Inc. profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been in a weak position compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been shrinking, which has been worse than most comparable firms.
• In past years, the company couldn't always turn a profit -available to repay debt and purchase properties-, which compares last-in-rank when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tended to shrink. It turns to be in a very weak position compared 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: 7.7

• BAX managed to pay little to no income taxes on profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better than peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a sparse portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
• The company shows business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a slight improvement compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 7.2

• Baxter International Inc. usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
• There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks similar to competitors.
• In the past, got very 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.4

• BAX 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 encouraging in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is below average when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came better than most competitors.
• Has somewhat increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and shouldn't be at risk. Sustainability looks somewhat worse 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 in good shape compared to rivals.
• The company uses a large 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 weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 3.9

• Baxter International Inc. 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 more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be in a very weak position 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.
• Most controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks weak when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a very weak position compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in good shape compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than six months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be well ranked against peers.
• On average pays suppliers two months after the purchase. It ranks below average 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 a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands worse than most 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is reasonable when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still slightly worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.5

• Baxter International Inc. reported losses, so valuating it in relation to earnings is meaningless. It happens to be last-in-rank 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 free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most similar companies.
• The company usually generates 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, at the current price the share might be interesting. It's still great when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up excellent in relation to peer ventures.
• The company is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks bottom tier against similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation has been negative, as the company lost money. It ranks last-in-rank 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 good shape compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is significantly high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly worse than peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a little money. It happens to be encouraging in relation 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 in good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.6

---

Awarener score: 7.1

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!