Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Blueprint Medicines Corporation (BPMC)

Awarener score: 4.6

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

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: 5.5

  • Business has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
  • Blueprint Medicines Corporation business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 2.0

  • BPMC profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually good. They stand somewhat better than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be pauper. It's encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually destitute. They remain a slight improvement compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be pauper in relation to total revenues. They're still somewhat better than similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually destitute considering total sales, and remain encouraging in relation to rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be pauper when confronted to sales. Company stands encouraging in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 2.3

  • Blueprint Medicines Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been impressive in relation 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: 4.0

  • BPMC 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 substantial portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
  • The company shows good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands excellent in relation to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.2

  • Blueprint Medicines Corporation usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually insufficient. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.6

  • BPMC 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 more than average in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually heavily investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is top tier 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 usually significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent in relation 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 very weak position 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: 5.7

  • Blueprint Medicines Corporation has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely irrelevant. It turns to be lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a tenth of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have minor claims on the company, and financial position is safe. It remains somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • A substantial portion of resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is better for liquidity. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has abundant dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has a lot of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month and a half credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
  • Normally has more than six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes plenty of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be mediocre against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers many months after the purchase. It ranks similar to industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers plenty of months before charging its customers, so there's a lot of money invested in working capital. It's in a weak position 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 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 good shape compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.1

  • Blueprint Medicines Corporation 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 in a weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands somewhat better than similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes 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 business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still great when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. It came up excellent in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company has substantial more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks mediocre 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 huge relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks rather normal in relation to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really 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 lost a lot of money. It happens to be encouraging in relation to 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 excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 3.6


BPMC logos

Company at a glance: Blueprint Medicines Corporation (BPMC)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: 3.88 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.23 billions

Blueprint Medicines Corporation, a precision therapy company, develops medicines for genomically defined cancers and blood disorders in the United States and internationally. The company is developing AYVAKIT for the treatment of systemic mastocytosis (SM) and gastrointestinal stromal tumors; BLU-263, an orally available, potent, and KIT inhibitor for the treatment of non-advanced SM and other mast cell disorders; and Fisogatinib, an orally available and potent inhibitor for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. It is also developing GAVRETO for the treatment of RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer, altered solid tumors, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and other solid tumors; BLU-701 and BLU-945 for the treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor driven non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC); and BLU-451 to treat NSCLC in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutations. In addition, the company is developing BLU-782, for the treatment of fibrodysplasia ossificans progressive; BLU- 222 to treat patients with cyclin E aberrant cancers; and BLU-852 for the treatment of advanced cancers. It has collaboration and license agreements with Clementia Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Proteovant Therapeutics; CStone Pharmaceuticals; Genentech, Inc.; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.; and Zai Lab (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. The company was formerly known as Hoyle Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and changed its name to Blueprint Medicines Corporation in June 2011. Blueprint Medicines Corporation was incorporated in 2008 and is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Awarener score: 4.6

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