Fundamental analysis: Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY)

Awarener score: 2.3

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 (Very poor), the business stability (unknown) and growth (unknown), 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: a result could not be reached

Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
Butterfly Network, Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 1.8

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

Growth score: 1.0

Butterfly Network, Inc. couldn't always profit -on goods and services sold- in the past years. It's been a disappointment compared 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: 3.0

BFLY 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 substantial portion of revenues. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
The company grows sparsely in relation to research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.2

Butterfly Network, Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
The company normally gets very poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a weak position compared to similar companies.
There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks almost average when measured against competitors.
In the past, got very poor 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: 2.8

BFLY 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 largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is more than average 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 has greatly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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: 5.2

Butterfly Network, Inc. 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 a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. There're no liquidity concerns. It turns to be in good shape 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 slightly better than rival firms.
A substantial portion of resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is better for liquidity. It looks encouraging in relation to rivals.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has abundant 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 a lot of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
Normally has more than six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a disappointment compared to competitors.
On average, it takes plenty of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks similar to industry peers.
The company pays its suppliers plenty of months before charging its customers, so there's a lot of money invested in working capital. It's a disappointment compared to 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 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 low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.4

Butterfly Network, 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 slight improvement compared to peers.
In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
The company usually consumes much more funds than can genuinely generate. Business needs are meet by borrowing money or consuming preexistent cash, which can only keep up until a certain limit. Unless the company is driving significant business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. 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 lacking compared to peer ventures.
This company is a cash hoarder. It might be well poised to substantially increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks better than most 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 large relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks lacking compared to rival firms.
The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is somewhat high. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat better than peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a lot of money. It happens to be weak when measured against industry peers.
In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a very low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is in dispute. It's still in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 2.8

Company at a glance: Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Medical Devices

Market Cap: 0.49 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.07 billions

Butterfly Network, Inc., a digital health company, develops, manufactures, and commercializes ultrasound imaging solutions in the United States and internationally. It offers Butterfly iQ, a handheld and single-probe whole body ultrasound system; Butterfly iQ+, a point-of-care ultrasound imaging device that connects with a smartphone, tablet, and hospital computer system; and Butterfly Blueprint, a system-wide ultrasound platform with Compass software that integrates into a healthcare system's clinical and administrative infrastructure. The company also provides Butterfly system, which includes probes, and related accessories and software subscriptions, to healthcare systems, physicians, and healthcare providers through a direct sales force, distributors, and eCommerce channel. In addition, it offers cloud-based software solutions to healthcare systems, teleguidance, in-app educational tutorials, and formal education programs through its Butterfly Academy software, as well as clinical support and services. Butterfly Network, Inc. was incorporated in 2011 and is headquartered in Guilford, Connecticut.