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

---

Fundamental analysis: TopBuild Corp. (BLD)

Awarener score: 8.0

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: 7.0

• Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
• TopBuild Corp. business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 6.7

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

Growth score: 8.0

• TopBuild Corp. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been excellent in relation to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a good step, which has been well ranked against comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very good pace, which compares more than average in relation to peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a very good tempo. It turns to be in good shape compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a very good speed. It was well ranked against rivals.
• In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been very good, and encouraging in relation to peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at an excellent rhythm in past years. It's been in good shape compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 5.0

• BLD had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better 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: 9.2

• TopBuild Corp. usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves top tier when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in good shape compared to similar companies.
• There's usually excellent profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks great when measured against 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: 6.2

• BLD usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is rather normal. It stands top tier when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing most of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, and saving a little funds for something else, which is almost average when measured against 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 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 moderate portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn very sour. It still looks similar to competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.6

• TopBuild Corp. has not disclosed intangibles assets, so we could not reach a meaningful conclusion on this metric. It happens to be a not known variable when measured with peer companies.
• The company has somewhat lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some liquidity concerns. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar firms.
• All resources are company owned, with virtually no financial debt. Financial position is outstanding. The company could significantly borrow money if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains top-notch against rival firms.
• Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a weak position compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is top-notch against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks top tier when measured against peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes less than one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be top-notch against peers.
• On average pays suppliers longer than two months after the purchase. It ranks great when measured against industry peers.
• The company charges its customers before it must pay its suppliers, so the more it sales, the more free funds it gets. It's impressive in relation to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are easily bearable. It stands slightly better than rival firms.
• There is insufficient data to conclude on the relationship of EBITDA and debt for this company. It ranks unknown against comparable enterprises.
• Fixed assets turnover remains undisclosed. It looks we cannot relate it to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is very good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.3

• TopBuild Corp. looks cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be top tier when measured against competitors.
• We have not enough data to conclude on the relationship of price versus tangible book value for this company. It remains therefore unknown compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could get, it reinvested in the business, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
• The company usually generates reasonably 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 fair. It's still almost average when measured 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 impressive in relation 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 better than most similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks great 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 in a very weak position compared to rival firms.
• We have not enough information on the relation between current stock price and accounting book value. The company remains a mystery against 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 top tier when measured against 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 impressive in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 7.0

---

Awarener score: 8.0

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!