Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Benefitfocus, Inc. (BNFT)

Awarener score: 4.9

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 (Lacking), the business stability (Excellent) and growth (Poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (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: 6.0

  • Business has been shrinking. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Benefitfocus, Inc. business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly better than rivals.

Margins score: 4.2

  • BNFT profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very good. They stand somewhat worse than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be meagre. It's encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually meagre. They remain rather normal in relation to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be very poor in relation to total revenues. They're still slightly better 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: 1.3

  • Benefitfocus, Inc. profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been in a weak position 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: 3.0

  • BNFT 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 similar to competitors.
  • The company hardly grows despite of research and development efforts. It stands in a very weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.0

  • Benefitfocus, Inc. usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
  • Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
  • Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown against competitors.
  • In the past, got meagre 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.6

  • BNFT usually uses a very large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is heavy. It stands almost average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing part of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping some funds for something else. It can't keep forever, which is below average when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid good dividends, considering the current stock price. It came better than most competitors.
  • In recent years, has cut back dividend payments. It could be traversing challenging times. The company has behaved a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • The company usually uses some portion of genuine funds generated to pay dividends. Dividend payments should be safe, unless business prospects take a nosedive. Sustainability looks mediocre against comparable companies.
  • The company somewhat enlarges a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in good shape 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 close to average when 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: 5.4

  • Benefitfocus, Inc. 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 more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Most resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have more claims on the company than shareholders. Unless the company is a financial institution that takes deposits, the situation might be very risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's close to average when compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month and a half credit. It still ranks almost average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month from the purchase. It ranks weak when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers less than one month before charging its customers, so there's little money invested in working capital. It's lacking compared to 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 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 modest 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 very weak position compared 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 better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.5

  • Benefitfocus, 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated some free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly better than 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 similar to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up in good shape compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks bottom tier against 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 not far from one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks excellent in relation to rival firms.
  • There's no accounting equity, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains bottom tier against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost significant money. It happens to be weak 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: 3.9


BNFT logos

Company at a glance: Benefitfocus, Inc. (BNFT)

Sector, industry: Technology, Software—Application

Market Cap: 0.21 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.25 billions

Benefitfocus, Inc. provides cloud-based benefits management technology solutions for employers and health plans in the United States. Its products for employers comprise Benefitplace, a cloud-based benefits management portal that streamlines online enrollment, employee communication, and benefit administration; Health Insights, a data analytics solution; ACA Management and Reporting, a solution for employers to manage ACA compliance; Billing & Payments, an application that synchronizes enrollment and billing information to streamline the monthly billing process, automate adjustments, and enhance accuracy of payments; and COBRA Administration, a solution that simplifies management of Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, benefits. The company's products for health plans include Enrollment that provides platform for carriers to automate enrollment across all segments of their commercial group business; Billing & Payments, an electronic invoice presentment and payment solution; Exchange, a solution that bridges the integration gap between health plan and employer systems; and Quoting that gives health plans and brokers tools to organize and proactively manage accounts, track leads, generate quotes, and create proposals for multiple products. Its products for brokers consist of Health Insights that support strategic decisions for their clients with on-demand health plan analytics; Benefit Catalog, which allows brokers to offer products to their clients; and benefit catalog consultative support for brokers through benefit advisors. The company also provides implementation services to its customers in order to help ensure seamless deployment and effective utilization of its solutions; and employers with expanded support services. The company was incorporated in 2000 and is headquartered in Charleston, South Carolina.

Awarener score: 4.9

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