Fundamental analysis: Bloom Energy Corporation (BE)

Awarener score: 4.3

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 (Lacking), the business stability (Lacking) and growth (Very good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).

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: 6.0

Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
Bloom Energy Corporation business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 3.0

BE profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very poor. They stand mediocre against rival companies.
Business profit on sales tends to be very poor. It's below average when measured against competitors.
Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually very poor. They remain in a weak position compared to peers.
Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be very poor in relation to total revenues. They're still mediocre against similar companies.
Profits -before income taxes- are usually very poor considering total sales, and remain weak when measured against rivals.
Total net profit tends to be very poor when confronted to sales. Company stands weak when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 2.0

Bloom Energy Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been excellent 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: 5.0

BE 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 low portion of revenues. It's below average when measured against competitors.
The company shows business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands lacking compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.5

Bloom Energy Corporation usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average 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 low 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: 2.2

BE on average doesn't generate genuine funds, so to buy or replace property, plants and equipment must either burn existing cash or increase debt. It stands below average when measured against rival firms.
The company is usually replacing most of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, and saving a little funds for something else, which is below average when measured against 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 has heavily enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a very 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 in a very weak position compared to rivals.
We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.1

Bloom Energy Corporation has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier 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.
A significant part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have almost as many claims on the company as shareholders. It remains worse than most rival firms.
Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. 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 close to average when compared to peer firms.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks great when measured against peers.
Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as close to average when compared to competitors.
On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
On average pays suppliers two months after the purchase. It ranks almost average when measured against industry peers.
The company pays its suppliers roughly three months before charging its customers, so there's sufficient money invested in working capital. It's a slight improvement 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 has usually been operated at a loss. Unless prospects improve, the company is no position to decrease loans taken levels but by additional shareholders' funding. Profitability must improve. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against 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 in a very weak position 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 somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.0

Bloom Energy Corporation 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 in a weak position compared to peers.
In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
In the past years the company hardly generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve enough to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still weak when measured against industry firms.
In the past twelve months, the company has significantly 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 numerous more stockholders. It came up in a 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 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 very high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a weak position compared 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 mediocre against peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business lost some money. 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 low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still lacking compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.7

Company at a glance: Bloom Energy Corporation (BE)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Electrical Equipment & Parts

Market Cap: 3.79 billions

Revenues TTM: 1.04 billions

Bloom Energy Corporation designs, manufactures, sells, and installs solid-oxide fuel cell systems for on-site power generation in the United States and internationally. The company offers Bloom Energy Server, a power generation platform that converts fuel, such as natural gas, biogas, hydrogen, or a blend of these fuels, into electricity through an electrochemical process without combustion. It serves data centers, hospitals, healthcare manufacturing facilities, biotechnology facilities, grocery stores, hardware stores, banks, telecom facilities and other critical infrastructure applications. The company was formerly known as Ion America Corp. and changed its name to Bloom Energy Corporation in September 2006. Bloom Energy Corporation was incorporated in 2001 and is headquartered in San Jose, California.