Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: The Beachbody Company, Inc. (BODY)

Awarener score: 1.9

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 (Bottom), the business stability (unknown) and growth (unknown), 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: a result could not be reached

  • Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
  • The Beachbody Company, Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 4.3

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

Growth score: 1.0

  • The Beachbody Company, Inc. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare 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: 2.7

  • BODY 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 a moderate portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
  • Business has seen substantial shrinking, despite research and development efforts. It stands in a very weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.0

  • The Beachbody Company, Inc. usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets meagre proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse when measured 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.0

  • BODY remains pending of analysis regarding capital expenditures, due to data unavailable. It stands substantially worse 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 encouraging in relation to 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 enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive in relation to peer enterprises.
  • We are not sure on the effectiveness of the company when repurchasing shares, as there were not enough numbers to crunch. It stands unidentified against 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

  • The Beachbody Company, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be almost average 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 in a very weak position compared to 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 top-notch 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 below average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks great 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 three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month from the purchase. It ranks below average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly two months before charging its customers, so there's some money invested in working capital. It's a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • Has usually been losing money on the business, so net interest expenses must be paid by increasing borrowings, which is unsustainable in the long run. The situation is very risky for both creditors and shareholders, profitability must increase. It stands bottom tier against rival firms.
  • There is insufficient data to conclude on the relationship of EBITDA and debt for this company. It ranks unknown 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 close to average when compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is excellent 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: 4.4

  • The Beachbody Company, 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 slight improvement 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 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 impressive in relation to peer ventures.
  • This company is sitting in a mountain of cash. It's very well poised to substantially 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 very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks excellent in relation to rival firms.
  • The stock price is significantly below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is extremely low, the stock may be selling at a large discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains somewhat better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty of money. It happens to be substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extremely low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is significantly in dispute. It's still in a very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.4


BODY logos

Company at a glance: The Beachbody Company, Inc. (BODY)

Sector, industry: Communication Services, Internet Content & Information

Market Cap: 0.12 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.76 billions

The Beachbody Company, Inc. operates as a health and wellness platform that provides fitness, nutrition, and stress-reducing programs. It operates in two segments, Beachbody and Other. The company operates Beachbody on Demand, a digital subscription platform that provides access to a library of live and on-demand fitness and nutrition content; and Openfit, a digital streaming platform that provides digital fitness and wellness resource. It also offers nutritional products, such as Shakeology, a once-a-day premium nutrition shake; Beachbody Performance supplements comprising pre-workout Energize, Hydrate, post-workout Recover, and protein supplement Recharge products; BEACHBARs low sugar, snack bars; and connected fitness equipment that include bikes and accessories. As of December 31, 2021, the company had 2.5 million digital and 0.3 million nutritional subscriptions. The Beachbody Company, Inc. was founded in 1998 and is headquartered in El Segundo, California.

Awarener score: 1.9

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 (Bottom), the business stability (unknown) and growth (unknown), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).