Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Biomerica, Inc. (BMRA)

Awarener score: 4.3

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 (Very poor) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).

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: 5.5

  • Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been more than average in relation to peer companies.
  • Biomerica, Inc. business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 2.8

  • BMRA profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually meagre. They stand worse than most rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be very poor. It's similar to competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually extremely poor. They remain close to average when compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be extremely poor in relation to total revenues. They're still slightly worse than similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually very poor considering total sales, and remain similar to rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be very poor when confronted to sales. Company stands similar to comparable firms.

Growth score: 2.3

  • Biomerica, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been rather normal in relation 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: 4.7

  • BMRA had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume some portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
  • The company shows good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a slight improvement compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.0

  • Biomerica, Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually insufficient. It ranks below average when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got very poor 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 2.4

  • BMRA 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 below average 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 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 enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains rather normal 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 in a very weak position 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: 6.6

  • Biomerica, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a non-significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is safer. It happens to be almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely irrelevant. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains slightly worse than rival firms.
  • A substantial portion of resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is better for liquidity. It looks similar to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in 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 more than enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks top tier when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat more than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in good shape compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be better than most peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month from the purchase. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's in good shape compared to similar companies.
  • To what extent normalized EBITDA covers interest expenses is not known. It stands impossible to compare 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 very good 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 huge considering yearly sales, which is great. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.4

  • Biomerica, Inc. 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 close to average when 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 slightly worse than 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 below average when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has 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 somewhat more stockholders. It came up rather normal 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 somewhat better 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 three or four to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks a slight improvement 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 somewhat worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost significant money. It happens to be below average 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 lacking compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.7


BMRA logos

Company at a glance: Biomerica, Inc. (BMRA)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Medical Devices

Market Cap: 0.05 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.02 billions

Biomerica, Inc., a biomedical technology company, develops, patents, manufactures, and markets diagnostic and therapeutic products for the detection and/or treatment of medical conditions and diseases worldwide. The company's diagnostic test kits are used to analyze blood, urine, nasal or fecal specimens from patients in the diagnosis of various diseases, food intolerances, and other medical complications; or to measure bacteria, hormones, antibodies, antigens, or other substances which may exist in the human body, stools, or blood in extremely small concentrations. It primarily sells its products for gastrointestinal diseases, food intolerances, and various esoteric tests at the physicians' offices and over-the-counter drugstores, and hospital/clinical laboratories. The company is also developing InFoods, that uses a simple blood sample to identify patient-specific foods which may alleviate irritable bowel syndrome symptoms; Helicobacter pylori test that indicates if a patient is infected with the H. Pylori bacteria. In addition, it develops products to indicate if a person has been infected by COVID-19. Biomerica, Inc. was incorporated in 1971 and is headquartered in Irvine, California.

Awarener score: 4.3

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 (Very poor) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).