Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Brighthouse Financial, Inc. (BHF)

Awarener score: 7.6

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (Very poor) and growth (Very good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).

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: 5.0

  • Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
  • Brighthouse Financial, Inc. business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks bottom tier against rivals.

Margins score: 3.8

  • BHF profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually destitute. They stand bottom tier against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be hardly sufficient. It's weak when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually meagre. They remain impressive in relation to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be meagre in relation to total revenues. They're still top-notch against similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually meagre considering total sales, and remain top tier when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be hardly sufficient when confronted to sales. Company stands top tier when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

  • Brighthouse Financial, Inc. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
  • There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown 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: 1.0

  • BHF had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against 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: 5.0

  • Brighthouse Financial, Inc. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually modest. 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 9.0

  • BHF 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 weak when measured against rival firms.
  • The relationship between capital expenditures and depreciation is not known, because of not enough inputs, which is a big question mark in relation to industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat worse than competitors.
  • Has greatly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved in good shape compared to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a non-significant portion of genuine funds generation and are likely very safe. Sustainability looks top-notch against comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive 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 impressive in relation to rivals.
  • The company uses a non-significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors. The company is usually improving its financial position, and could greatly boost stockholder rewards if it wished so. It still looks great when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.5

  • Brighthouse Financial, 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.
  • Current ratio remains a mystery, as there was not sufficient Balance Sheet information. It turns to be unidentifiable against similar firms.
  • Very few resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is very solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains somewhat better than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks encouraging in relation to rivals.
  • Quick ratio is unavailable at this moment, due to lacking data. It's a pity we cannot compare it with peer firms.
  • A conclusion on cash ratio could not be reached, as we lack inputs, which is unfortunate when trying to measure against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on many months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
  • Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
  • We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
  • Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
  • Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against similar companies.
  • Usual business earnings barely cover net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but hardly shareholders. Situation is risky, profitability must increase, or additional stockholders' funding will eventually be required. 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Fixed assets turnover remains undisclosed. It looks we cannot relate it to similar firms.
  • Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 9.2

  • Brighthouse Financial, Inc. has an unknown adjusted Price-to-Earnings ratio, so we cannot comment on that. It happens to be a necessary comparison 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 excellent in relation to peers.
  • There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
  • Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up in good shape compared to peer ventures.
  • We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks very 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 very attractive. It ranks almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks rather normal in relation to rival firms.
  • The stock price is at or below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is really low, the stock may be selling a t a discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains better than most peer firms.
  • We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
  • An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 4.9


BHF logos

Company at a glance: Brighthouse Financial, Inc. (BHF)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Insurance—Life

Market Cap: 3.84 billions

Revenues TTM: 8.52 billions

Brighthouse Financial, Inc. provides annuity and life insurance products in the United States. It operates through three segments: Annuities, Life, and Run-off. The Annuities segment offers variable, fixed, index-linked, and income annuities for contract holders' needs for protected wealth accumulation on a tax-deferred basis, wealth transfer, and income security. The Life segment provides term, universal, whole, and variable life policies for policyholders' needs for financial security and protected wealth transfer. The Run-off segment manages structured settlements, pension risk transfer contracts, certain company-owned life insurance policies, funding agreements, and universal life with secondary guarantees. The company was incorporated in 2016 and is based in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Awarener score: 7.6

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (Very poor) and growth (Very good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).