• Twitter
• Facebook
• Snapchat
• Pinterest
• LinkedIn
• Tumblr

---

Fundamental analysis: BOK Financial Corporation (BOKF)

Awarener score: 5.8

Conclusion

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: 4.5

• Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
• BOK Financial Corporation business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 8.3

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

Growth score: 5.4

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

Miscellaneous score: 5.0

• BOKF had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly worse than 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: 7.0

• BOK Financial Corporation usually gets sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
• There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks similar to competitors.
• In the past, got 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.1

• BOKF 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 encouraging in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually not replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat worse than competitors.
• In recent years, has slightly cut back dividend payments. The company has behaved in a very weak position compared 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 neither enlarges nor reduces the pool of investors, resulting in approximately the same mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a slight improvement 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 in a weak position 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: 7.0

• BOK Financial Corporation 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 substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
• The company has a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. There're no liquidity concerns. It turns to be close to average when compared to similar firms.
• A very minor portion of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains mediocre against rival firms.
• Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has a lot of 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 a lot of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks below 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 mediocre against peers.
• On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks similar to industry peers.
• The company charges its customers long before it must pay its suppliers, so the more it sales, the more free funds it gets. It's rather normal in relation 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 earnings have usually been reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks almost average 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.8

• BOK Financial Corporation looks cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be below average 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 in a weak position compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated extraordinary free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat better than similar companies.
• The company usually consumes much 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 significant business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still similar to 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 rather normal in relation to peer ventures.
• The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be attractive. It ranks below average 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 lacking 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 mediocre against peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned great money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be weak when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an excellent earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be undervalued. It's still in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.9

---

Awarener score: 5.8

Conclusion

Support us!

We are an independent project. No ads, no suscription, no registration required.

• Donate!