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

---

Fundamental analysis: Boston Scientific Corporation (BSX)

Awarener score: 5.5

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: 6.5

• Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
• Boston Scientific Corporation business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 7.5

• BSX profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually excellent. They stand well ranked against rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be good. It's great when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually good. They remain excellent 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 better than most 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 very good when confronted to sales. Company stands top tier when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 7.9

• Boston Scientific Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been lacking compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at an excellent step, which has been better than most comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very good pace, which compares more than average in relation to peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a good tempo. It turns to be in good shape compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an excellent speed. It was better than most 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: 7.3

• BSX managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been top-notch against peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a low portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
• The company grows sparsely in relation to research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 7.2

• Boston Scientific Corporation usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves great when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
• There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks great when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got very good 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: 5.9

• BSX 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 replacing most of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, and saving a little funds for something else, which is almost average when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid very little dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
• Has significantly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects probably have improved. The company has behaved rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a slight portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks top-notch against comparable companies.
• The company barely enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in slightly 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 rather normal in relation to rivals.
• We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 3.9

• Boston Scientific Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very large portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major 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 in a very weak position 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 slightly worse than rival firms.
• Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks last-in-rank 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 very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
• Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as rather normal in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
• On average pays suppliers approximately three 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 rather normal in relation to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands slightly worse than 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 reasonable 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 slightly low when yearly sales are considered, business volume should be increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still slightly worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.8

• Boston Scientific Corporation profits are really small compared to market valuation, market valuation doesn't rely on current earnings. It happens to be weak 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 disappointment compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most similar companies.
• In the past years the company barely generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still more than average in relation to 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 in good shape compared to peer ventures.
• The company has barely more debt than cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks mediocre against similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is huge, as profits were extremely low in relative terms. It ranks weak when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very large relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks lacking compared 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 somewhat worse than peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a little money. It happens to be more than average in relation to industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a modest earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.3

---

Awarener score: 5.5

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!