Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Blucora, Inc. (BCOR)

Awarener score: 6.3

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 (Excellent) and growth (Good), 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: 8.0

  • Business has been growing at a good pace. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Blucora, Inc. business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 4.5

  • BCOR profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually good. They stand somewhat better than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be meagre. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually meagre. They remain a disappointment compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be meagre in relation to total revenues. They're still bottom tier against similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually meagre considering total sales, and remain last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be meagre when confronted to sales. Company stands last-in-rank when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.7

  • Blucora, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against 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.
  • In the previous years, the firm couldn't always make a profit -before income taxes and interests on loans taken-. It turns to be a disappointment 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: 6.3

  • BCOR had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a very little portion of revenues. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • The company shows very good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands in a weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 4.2

  • Blucora, Inc. usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets low 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 lacking. It ranks last-in-rank 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.8

  • BCOR usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is large. It stands last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing part of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping some funds for something else. It can't keep forever, 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 neither enlarges nor reduces the pool of investors, resulting in approximately the same mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains close to average when 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 more than average in relation to competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.2

  • Blucora, 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 roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be lacking 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 bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks almost 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 in a weak position compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks more than average in relation to peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less than one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be well ranked against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers during the first couple of weeks from the purchase. It ranks almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers less than one month before charging its customers, so there's little money invested in working capital. It's lacking compared to similar companies.
  • Has usually been losing money on the business, so net interest expenses must be paid by increasing borrowings, which is unsustainable in the long run. The situation is very risky for both creditors and shareholders, profitability must increase. It stands bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been extremely low when measured against loans taken. Even severely cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than twenty years to repay the obligations. Additional stockholders' funding may be a quicker way, but at the cost of increasing the mouths to feed on the eventual pie of profits. It ranks substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are very good 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is very good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.7

  • Blucora, Inc. looks heavily expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be substantially worse 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 good 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 almost average 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 in a very weak position compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is very high. A lot of improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is risky. It ranks substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a more than one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks impressive in relation 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 somewhat worse 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 substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a somewhat low 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: 4.9


BCOR logos

Company at a glance: Blucora, Inc. (BCOR)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Asset Management

Market Cap: 1.13 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.91 billions

Blucora, Inc. provides technology-enabled financial solutions to consumers, small business owners, tax professionals, financial advisors, and certified public accounting firms in the United States. The company operates through two segments, Wealth Management and Tax Preparation. The Wealth Management segment offers an integrated platform of brokerage, investment advisory, and insurance services to financial advisors. The Tax Preparation segment provides digital do-it-yourself tax preparation solutions through TaxAct.com; and ancillary services, including refund payment transfer, audit defense, stored value cards, retirement plan services, and e-filing services. This segment also offers professional tax preparer software that allows professional tax preparers to prepare and file individual and business returns. The company was formerly known as InfoSpace, Inc. and changed its name to Blucora, Inc. in June 2012. Blucora, Inc. was founded in 1996 and is headquartered in Dallas, Texas.

Awarener score: 6.3

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