Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Bank of Marin Bancorp (BMRC)

Awarener score: 5.0

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 (Modest), the business stability (Good) and growth (Average), 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: 6.5

  • Business has been growing at a low pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
  • Bank of Marin Bancorp business trend stability is good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 7.5

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

Growth score: 3.8

  • Bank of Marin Bancorp has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
  • There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very low pace, which compares similar to peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a very low tempo. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a very low speed. It was slightly worse than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been very low, and similar to peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have been almost stagnant in past years. It's been rather normal in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

  • BMRC had to pay a lot of income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been mediocre 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: 6.2

  • Bank of Marin Bancorp usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks almost average when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got barely sufficient 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: 2.8

  • BMRC 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 sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly better than competitors.
  • Dividend payments have been more or less stable in recent years. The company has behaved rather normal in relation 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.
  • The company generates very few genuine funds. Investor rewards must be paid burning existing cash or by borrowing money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, stockholder compensation could be at risk. It still looks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.0

  • Bank of Marin Bancorp intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Current ratio remains a mystery, as there was not sufficient Balance Sheet information. It turns to be unidentifiable against similar firms.
  • Almost no resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is great. Company could significantly increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains well ranked against rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks great when measured against rivals.
  • Quick ratio is unavailable at this moment, due to lacking data. It's a pity we cannot compare it with peer firms.
  • A conclusion on cash ratio could not be reached, as we lack inputs, which is unfortunate when trying to measure against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on many months credit. It still ranks substantially worse 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 excellent when measured against loans taken. It could take less than two years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks great 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 a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.5

  • Bank of Marin Bancorp has an unknown adjusted Price-to-Earnings ratio, so we cannot comment on that. It happens to be a necessary comparison 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 lacking compared to peers.
  • There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
  • Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure 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 a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding 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 weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a weak position compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat worse than peer firms.
  • We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
  • An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 5.2


BMRC logos

Company at a glance: Bank of Marin Bancorp (BMRC)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Banks—Regional

Market Cap: 0.49 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.13 billions

Bank of Marin Bancorp operates as the holding company for Bank of Marin that provides a range of financial services primarily to small to medium-sized businesses, professionals, not-for-profit organizations, and individuals in California, the United States. It offers personal and business checking and savings accounts; and individual retirement, health savings, and demand deposit marketplace accounts, as well as time certificates of deposit, certificate of deposit account registry and insured cash sweep services. The company also provides commercial real estate, commercial and industrial, and consumer loans, as well as construction financing and home equity lines of credit. In addition, it offers merchant and payroll, and cash management services; credit cards; fraud detection tools; and mobile deposit, remote deposit capture, automated clearing house, wire transfer, and image lockbox services. Further, the company provides wealth management and trust services comprising customized investment portfolio management, financial planning, trust administration, estate settlement, and custody services, as well as 401(k) plan services; and automated teller machines, and telephone and digital banking services. It operates through 12 branch offices in Marin, southern Sonoma counties, and north of San Francisco, California; and a loan production office in San Francisco. The company was incorporated in 1989 and is headquartered in Novato, California.

Awarener score: 5.0

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 (Modest), the business stability (Good) and growth (Average), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).