Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Ball Corporation (BLL)

Awarener score: 6.2

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 (Very good) and growth (Modest), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very 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: 6.5

  • Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • Ball Corporation business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks bottom tier against rivals.

Margins score: 6.0

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

Growth score: 5.4

  • Ball Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very low step, which has been mediocre against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very low pace, which compares weak when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a normal tempo. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a good speed. It was mediocre against rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been average, and weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a good rhythm in past years. It's been in a weak position compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 6.0

  • BLL had to pay sparse income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been worse than most 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: 8.0

  • Ball Corporation usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually excellent profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got very 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.7

  • BLL usually uses a slight portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is light. It stands last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
  • Has increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • The company usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to pay dividends. There could be some concerns on sustainability if business takes a dive. Sustainability looks worse than most comparable companies.
  • The company usually reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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 slight improvement 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: 4.4

  • Ball Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very large 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 last-in-rank when measured against 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.
  • A significant part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have almost as many claims on the company as shareholders. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks last-in-rank when measured against 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 extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat more than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a disappointment compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers almost when charging its customers, so there's very little money invested in working capital. It's a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands worse than most rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been low when measured against loans taken. Even cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than seven years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are low 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 a disappointment 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 bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.9

  • Ball Corporation looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be substantially worse 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 neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could generate, it reinvested in the business, which stands bottom tier against similar companies.
  • In the past years the company barely generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still last-in-rank when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has slightly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is somewhat high. Improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which presents some risks. It ranks substantially worse 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 a disappointment compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really 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 last-in-rank 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 a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.0


BLL logos

Company at a glance: Ball Corporation (BLL)

Sector, industry: Consumer Goods, Packaging & Containers

Market Cap: 22.51 billions

Revenues TTM: 14.40 billions

Ball Corporation supplies aluminum packaging products for the beverage, personal care, and household products industries in the United States, Brazil, and internationally. It operates through four segments: Beverage Packaging, North and Central America; Beverage Packaging, Europe, Middle East and Africa; Beverage Packaging, South America; and Aerospace. The company manufactures and sells aluminum beverage containers to fillers of carbonated soft drinks, beer, energy drinks, and other beverages. It also develops spacecraft, sensors and instruments, radio frequency systems, and other technologies for the civil, commercial, and national security aerospace markets, as well as offers defense hardware, antenna and video tactical solutions, civil and operational space hardware, and systems engineering services. In addition, the company designs, manufactures, and tests satellites, remote sensors, and ground station control hardware and software; and provides launch vehicle integration and satellite operational services. Further, it offers target identification, warning, and attitude control systems and components; cryogenic systems and associated sensor cooling devices; star trackers; and fast-steering mirrors to the government agencies or their prime contractors. Additionally, the company manufactures and sells extruded aluminum aerosol containers, recloseable aluminum bottles, aluminum cups, and aluminum slugs. Ball Corporation was founded in 1880 and is headquartered in Westminster, Colorado.

Awarener score: 6.2

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