Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: BlueLinx Holdings Inc. (BXC)

Awarener score: 8.1

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

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 good pace. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • BlueLinx Holdings Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 5.5

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

Growth score: 3.3

  • BlueLinx Holdings Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been excellent 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.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an extremely fast pace, which compares great 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: 7.0

  • BXC had hardly to pay income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. 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: 9.5

  • BlueLinx Holdings Inc. usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
  • Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown against 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.0

  • BXC usually uses a modest portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments isn't too high. It stands almost average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank 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 very weak position 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 a slight portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors. The company is usually improving its financial position, and could most likely increase stockholder rewards if it wished to do so. It still looks top tier when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.2

  • BlueLinx Holdings Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be encouraging in relation to 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 impressive in relation 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 bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks top tier when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's impressive in relation to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks great when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be better than most peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month from the purchase. It ranks substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly two months before charging its customers, so there's some money invested in working capital. It's a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been quite good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take around three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks similar to comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are excellent 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 impressive in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is huge considering yearly sales, which is great. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 8.4

  • BlueLinx Holdings Inc. looks extremely cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be top tier 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 good shape compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated extraordinary free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands top-notch against 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 top tier when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up in a very weak position compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks bottom tier against 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 top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks impressive in relation 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 better than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be top tier when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extreme earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be significantly undervalued. It's still impressive in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.4


BXC logos

Company at a glance: BlueLinx Holdings Inc. (BXC)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Building Products & Equipment

Market Cap: 0.76 billions

Revenues TTM: 4.58 billions

BlueLinx Holdings Inc., together with its subsidiaries, distributes residential and commercial building products in the United States. The company distributes specialty products comprising engineered wood, industrial products, cedar, moulding, siding, metal, and insulation products; and structural products include lumber, plywood, oriented strand boards, rebars and remesh, spruce, and other wood products primarily that are used for structural support in construction projects. It also provides various value-added services and solutions to customers and suppliers. The company serves dealers, specialty distributors, national home centers, and manufactured housing customers through a network of distribution centers. BlueLinx Holdings Inc. was incorporated in 2004 and is headquartered in Marietta, Georgia.

Awarener score: 8.1

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