Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Blackstone Secured Lending Fund (BXSL)

Awarener score: 10.0

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 (unknown) and growth (unknown), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).

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: a result could not be reached

  • Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
  • Blackstone Secured Lending Fund business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 9.8

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

Growth score: 1.0

  • Blackstone Secured Lending Fund has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
  • There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown 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: 8.0

  • BXSL managed to pay little to no income taxes on profits made in the past years. It's been well ranked 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: 6.5

  • Blackstone Secured Lending Fund usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks weak when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.4

  • BXSL 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 weak when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually not 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 it paid outstanding dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly better than competitors.
  • Has greatly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved excellent in relation to similar firms.
  • The company generates very few genuine funds. Dividend payments are usually on borrowed money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, future payments could be at risk. Sustainability looks bottom tier against comparable companies.
  • The company barely enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in slightly more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a slight improvement 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 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: 7.1

  • Blackstone Secured Lending Fund 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.
  • Current ratio remains a mystery, as there was not sufficient Balance Sheet information. It turns to be unidentifiable against similar firms.
  • All resources are company owned, with virtually no financial debt. Financial position is outstanding. The company could significantly borrow money if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains worse than most rival firms.
  • Most resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is best for liquidity. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • Quick ratio is unavailable at this moment, due to lacking data. It's a pity we cannot compare it with peer firms.
  • A conclusion on cash ratio could not be reached, as we lack inputs, which is unfortunate when trying to measure against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks top tier 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 impressive in relation 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.
  • There is insufficient data to conclude on the relationship of EBITDA and debt for this company. It ranks unknown against comparable enterprises.
  • Fixed assets turnover remains undisclosed. It looks we cannot relate it to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.2

  • Blackstone Secured Lending Fund has an unknown adjusted Price-to-Earnings ratio, so we cannot comment on that. It happens to be a necessary comparison 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 slight improvement 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.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up rather normal in relation to peer ventures.
  • We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks almost average 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 a disappointment compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be more than reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat better than peer firms.
  • We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
  • An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 6.3


BXSL logos

Company at a glance: Blackstone Secured Lending Fund (BXSL)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Asset Management

Market Cap: 3.95 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.50 billions

Blackstone Secured Lending Fund is business development company and a Delaware statutory trust formed on March 26, 2018, and structured as an externally managed, non-diversified closed-end investment Fund. On October 26, 2018, the fund elected to be regulated as a business development company ("BDC") under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the "1940 Act"). In addition, the Fund elected to be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes, as a regulated investment company ("RIC"), as defined under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"). The fund also intends to continue to comply with the requirements prescribed by the Code in order to maintain tax treatment as a RIC. The fund's investment objectives are to generate current income and, to a lesser extent, long-term capital appreciation. The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective primarily through originated loans, equity and other securities, including syndicated loans, of private U.S. companies, specifically small and middle market companies, typically in the form of first lien senior secured and unitranche loans (including first out/last out loans), and to a lesser extent, second lien, third lien, unsecured and subordinated loans and other debt and equity securities.

Awarener score: 10.0

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 (unknown) and growth (unknown), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).