Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV (BUD)

Awarener score: 5.6

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (Good) and growth (Very poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (unknown).

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 has been shrinking at a fast pace. It's been last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV business trend stability is good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 8.7

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

Growth score: 5.4

  • Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very weak position compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very low step, which has been somewhat worse than 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.
  • Growth on earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been almost stagnant. It turns to be lacking 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 very good, and great when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a very good rhythm in past years. It's been excellent in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

  • BUD had to pay a lot of income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been mediocre 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: 8.2

  • Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks similar to competitors.
  • In the past, got huge 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: 7.0

  • BUD remains pending of analysis regarding capital expenditures, due to data unavailable. It stands great when measured against rival firms.
  • The relationship between capital expenditures and depreciation is not known, because of not enough inputs, which is a big question mark in relation to industry peers.
  • There was no available information regarding dividend yield. It came unknown 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 barely enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in slightly more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains lacking 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

  • Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a huge 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 lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might be liquidity concerns. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • A significant part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have almost as many claims on the company as shareholders. It remains somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately three months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as lacking compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than four months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat worse than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers many months after the purchase. It ranks top tier when measured against 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 impressive in relation to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a significant portion of usual business earnings, but are mostly bearable. It stands mediocre against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been very low when measured against loans taken. Even significantly cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than ten years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks weak 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 very weak position 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 bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.0

  • Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV looks very expensive 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
  • There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
  • Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure against industry firms.
  • A conclusion regarding usual company rewards to stockholders was impossible to reach with data available. It came up also not enough to relate 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 is somewhat high. Improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which presents some risks. It ranks below 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 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 well ranked against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. 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 very good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 5.8


BUD logos

Company at a glance: Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV (BUD)

Sector, industry: Consumer Defensive, Beverages—Brewers

Market Cap: 93.44 billions

Revenues TTM: 54.30 billions

Anheuser-Busch InBev SA/NV engages in the production, distribution, and sale of beer, alcoholic beverages, and soft drinks worldwide. It offers a portfolio of approximately 500 beer brands, which primarily include Budweiser, Corona, and Stella Artois; Beck's, Hoegaarden, Leffe, and Michelob Ultra; and Aguila, Antarctica, Bud Light, Brahma, Cass, Castle, Castle Lite, Cristal, Harbin, Jupiler, Modelo Especial, Quilmes, Victoria, Sedrin, and Skol brands. The company was founded in 1366 and is headquartered in Leuven, Belgium.

Awarener score: 5.6

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (Good) and growth (Very poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (unknown).