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

---

Fundamental analysis: Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. (BOOT)

Awarener score: 6.5

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: 6.0

• Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
• Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 7.0

• BOOT profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually sufficient. They stand mediocre against rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be very good. It's top tier when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually good. They remain impressive in relation to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be good in relation to total revenues. They're still top-notch against similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually good considering total sales, and remain great when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands great when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 8.9

• Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been impressive in relation to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at an excellent step, which has been somewhat better than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an excellent pace, which compares encouraging in relation to peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at an excellent tempo. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an excellent speed. It was slightly better than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been excellent, and encouraging in relation to peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at an excellent rhythm in past years. It's been a slight improvement compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 5.0

• BOOT had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been well ranked 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: 9.0

• Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
• There's usually excellent profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks similar to competitors.
• In the past, got excellent 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.8

• BOOT usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is large. It stands great when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is great 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 somewhat enlarges a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a weak position compared 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: 4.8

• Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent some 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 last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
• The company has more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains better than most 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 substantially worse when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a very weak position compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
• Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a disappointment compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than six months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
• On average pays suppliers longer than two months after the purchase. It ranks encouraging in relation to industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers six months or more before charging its customers, so there's abundant money invested in working capital. It's a disappointment compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a slight portion of usual business earnings, and are very easily bearable. It stands somewhat better than rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks great when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are somewhat low 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 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 worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.7

• Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. looks reasonable in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be similar to 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 neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could generate, it reinvested in the business, which stands slightly better than similar companies.
• The company usually generates somewhat more than enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Surplus cash may be used to repay loans, to eventually buy new businesses, or to reward investors. Considering the financial position and stock price, the current valuation might be reasonable. It's still almost average when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company hasn't rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up in a weak position compared to peer ventures.
• The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks well ranked against similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be more or less reasonable, but hardly cheap. It ranks almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a roughly two to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a very weak position compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is significantly high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains mediocre against peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned good money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be similar to industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.4

---

Awarener score: 6.5

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!