Fundamental analysis: BK Technologies Corporation (BKTI)

Awarener score: 2.6

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 (Poor), the business stability (Poor) and growth (Bottom), 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: 2.0

Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
BK Technologies Corporation business varies, ups and downs are rather normal. Risk is sufficient. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 2.7

BKTI profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually destitute. They stand bottom tier against rival companies.
Business profit on sales tends to be very poor. It's last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually very poor. They remain in a very 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 worse than most similar companies.
Profits -before income taxes- are usually very poor considering total sales, and remain substantially worse when measured against rivals.
Total net profit tends to be very poor when confronted to sales. Company stands substantially worse when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

BK Technologies Corporation 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: 1.0

BKTI 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: 3.2

BK Technologies Corporation usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
The company normally gets meagre proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment compared to similar companies.
There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse when measured 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.4

BKTI 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 weak when measured against rival firms.
The company is usually replacing the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping its operating capabilities up to date, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
In the past twelve months it paid excellent dividends, considering the current stock price. It came well ranked against competitors.
Has significantly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects probably have improved. The company has behaved a slight improvement 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 usually enlarges quite 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.
We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.2

BK Technologies 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 more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar firms.
A very minor portion of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains slightly better than rival firms.
Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
Normally has approximately five months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks encouraging in relation to industry peers.
The company pays its suppliers six months or more before charging its customers, so there's abundant money invested in working capital. It's in a weak position 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 reasonable 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 weak position 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 somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.4

BK Technologies 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 rather normal in relation 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 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 roughly two to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks close to average when compared to rival firms.
The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly worse than peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a lot of money. It happens to be last-in-rank 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 in a very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 2.7

Company at a glance: BK Technologies Corporation (BKTI)

Sector, industry: Technology, Communication Equipment

Market Cap: 0.05 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.03 billions

BK Technologies Corporation, through its subsidiary, BK Technologies, Inc., engages in design, manufacture, and markets wireless communications products in the United States and internationally. The company offers two-way land mobile radios (LMR), repeaters, base stations, and related components and subsystems. Its BK Technologies, BKR, and BK Radio branded products include LMR equipment for professional radio users primarily in government, public safety, and military applications, as well as P-25 digital products; and RELM branded products provide two-way communications for commercial and industrial concerns, such as hotels, construction firms, schools, and transportation services. The company was incorporated in 1997 and is headquartered in West Melbourne, Florida.