• Twitter
• Facebook
• Snapchat
• Pinterest
• LinkedIn
• Tumblr

---

Fundamental analysis: Booking Holdings Inc. (BKNG)

Awarener score: 5.0

Conclusion

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 has been growing at a very good pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
• Booking Holdings Inc. business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 9.0

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

Growth score: 6.0

• Booking Holdings Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a good pace. It's been close to average when 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.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a normal pace, which compares weak when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a good tempo. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an excellent speed. It was mediocre against rivals.
• In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been extremely high, and weak when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have been shrinking in the past years. It's been in a very weak position compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 8.3

• BKNG had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been mediocre against peers.
• Research and development expenses hardly consume a portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
• The company shows excellent business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 10.0

• Booking Holdings Inc. usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves top tier when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets huge proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks encouraging in relation to competitors.
• In the past, got huge 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 top tier when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.1

• BKNG usually uses a modest portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments isn't too high. It stands top tier when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is weak when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid very little dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
• Has recently started or restarted paying dividends to stockholders. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved impressive in relation to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a non-significant portion of genuine funds generation and are likely very safe. Sustainability looks mediocre against 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 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 close to average when compared to rivals.
• The company uses a lot more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so they're paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business improves, or rewards won't keep at current pace. It still looks substantially worse when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.3

• Booking Holdings 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 substantially worse 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 close to average when compared to similar firms.
• A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains slightly worse than rival firms.
• Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks great 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 rather normal in relation to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month and a half credit. It still ranks below average 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.
• 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 earnings have usually been good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are excellent 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 in good shape compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is quite good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.5

• Booking Holdings Inc. looks somewhat expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be below average 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 slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands well ranked against similar companies.
• The company usually generates somewhat 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 reasonable. It's still encouraging in relation to industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has greatly 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 plenty more stockholders. It came up in a very weak position compared to peer ventures.
• The company has more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks slightly better than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is high. Substantial improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is somewhat risky. It ranks below average 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 very 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 worse than most peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be great when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a modest earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.8

---

Awarener score: 5.0

Conclusion

Support us!

We are an independent project. No ads, no suscription, no registration required.

• Donate!