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

---

Fundamental analysis: Berry Corporation (BRY)

Awarener score: 8.1

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: 5.0

• Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
• Berry Corporation business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 6.0

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

Growth score: 2.1

• Berry Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been rather normal 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: 10.0

• BRY managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been top-notch 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: 5.5

• Berry Corporation usually gets sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually modest. 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.9

• BRY usually uses a significant portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is abundant. It stands below average when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually somewhat investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is weak when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid outstanding dividends, considering the current stock price. It came top-notch against competitors.
• Has greatly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• The company usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to pay dividends. Dividend payments should be safe, unless business prospects are challenged. Sustainability looks somewhat worse than comparable companies.
• The company usually significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains close to average when 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.
• The company uses somewhat more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so some part of them is paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business somewhat improves, or rewards will probably not be sustained at this pace. It still looks weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.8

• Berry 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 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 close to average when compared to similar firms.
• Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains somewhat worse than rival firms.
• Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks weak when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of 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 very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes close to one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
• Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers roughly one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a significant portion of usual business earnings, but are mostly bearable. It stands somewhat worse 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 below average when measured 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 excellent in relation to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is quite good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 8.6

• Berry Corporation looks extremely cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation 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 excellent in relation 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 generates much more 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, at the current price the share might be very interesting. It's still more than average in relation to industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up impressive in relation to peer ventures.
• The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks worse than most similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks extremely cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be very hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, a weak financial position, or that earnings aren't representative. If that isn't the case, the stock price could be extremely attractive. It ranks great when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks excellent in relation to rival firms.
• The stock price is at or below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is really low, the stock may be selling a t a discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains better than most 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 almost average when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a very 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: 6.1

---

Awarener score: 8.1

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!