Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Bunge Limited (BG)

Awarener score: 5.9

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

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: 5.5

  • Business has been growing at a low pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
  • Bunge Limited business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 4.5

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

Growth score: 2.1

  • Bunge Limited profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been in good shape 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: 4.0

  • BG had to pay substantial income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse than 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: 6.5

  • Bunge Limited usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets sufficient 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 encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got 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 similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.5

  • BG 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 similar to rival firms.
  • The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat worse than competitors.
  • In recent years, has slightly cut back dividend payments. The company has behaved in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • The company generates very few genuine funds. Dividend payments are usually on borrowed money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, future payments could be at risk. Sustainability looks bottom tier against comparable companies.
  • The company somewhat enlarges a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains lacking 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 a disappointment compared to rivals.
  • The company generates very few genuine funds. Investor rewards must be paid burning existing cash or by borrowing money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, stockholder compensation could be at risk. It still looks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.6

  • Bunge Limited 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 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.
  • Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat more than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as lacking compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly better than peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks below 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 close to average when compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks below average when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are huge 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 impressive in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is huge considering yearly sales, which is great. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.5

  • Bunge Limited looks cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation 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 close to average when 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 bottom tier against similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes 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 business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still substantially worse 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 lacking 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 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 very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks impressive in relation to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned great money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. 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 very good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a slight improvement compared to peer companies.

Total score: 4.8


BG logos

Company at a glance: Bunge Limited (BG)

Sector, industry: Consumer Defensive, Farm Products

Market Cap: 12.64 billions

Revenues TTM: 64.61 billions

Bunge Limited operates as an agribusiness and food company worldwide. It operates through four segments: Agribusiness, Refined and Specialty Oils, Milling, and Sugar and Bioenergy. The Agribusiness segment purchases, stores, transports, processes, and sells agricultural commodities and commodity products, including oilseeds primarily soybeans, rapeseed, canola, and sunflower seeds, as well as grains primarily wheat and corn; and processes oilseeds into vegetable oils and protein meals. This segment offers its products for animal feed manufacturers, livestock producers, wheat and corn millers, and other oilseed processors, as well as third-party edible oil processing and biofuel companies; and for industrial and biodiesel production applications. The Refined and Specialty Oils segment sells packaged and bulk oils and fats that include cooking oils, shortenings, margarines, mayonnaise, and other products for baked goods companies, snack food producers, confectioners, restaurant chains, foodservice operators, infant nutrition companies, and other food manufacturers, as well as grocery chains, wholesalers, distributors, and other retailers. The Milling segment provides wheat flours and bakery mixes; corn milling products that comprise dry-milled corn meals and flours, wet-milled masa and flours, and flaking and brewer's grits, as well as soy-fortified corn meal, corn-soy blends, and other products; whole grain and fiber ingredients; quinoas and millets; die-cut pellets; and non-GMO products. The Sugar and Bioenergy segment produces sugar and ethanol; and generates electricity from burning sugarcane bagasse. Bunge Limited was founded in 1818 and is headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri.

Awarener score: 5.9

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