Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: China Automotive Systems, Inc. (CAAS)

Awarener score: 5.8

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 (Very good), the business stability (Lacking) and growth (Very poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Average).

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: 3.0

  • Business has been shrinking at a fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • China Automotive Systems, Inc. business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 4.7

  • CAAS profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very poor. They stand mediocre against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be hardly sufficient. It's below average when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually hardly sufficient. 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 hardly sufficient considering total sales, and remain below average when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be hardly sufficient when confronted to sales. Company stands below average when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 3.3

  • China Automotive Systems, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very weak position compared 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 a 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 an extremely fast tempo. It turns to be excellent in relation 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: 3.7

  • CAAS had to pay too much income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been worse than most peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a sparse portion of revenues. It's encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • Business has seen substantial shrinking, despite research and development efforts. It stands a disappointment compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 5.0

  • China Automotive Systems, Inc. usually gets hardly 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 below average when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got barely 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: 6.7

  • CAAS 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 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 similar to 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 usually neither enlarges nor reduces the pool of investors, resulting in approximately the same mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in good shape 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 impressive in relation to rivals.
  • The company uses a non-significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors. The company is usually improving its financial position, and could greatly boost stockholder rewards if it wished so. It still looks top tier when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.1

  • China Automotive Systems, Inc. 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 more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be in a weak position 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.
  • Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks encouraging in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on many months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers plenty of months before charging its customers, so there's a lot of money invested in working capital. It's a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a slight portion of usual business earnings, and are very easily bearable. It stands better than most 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 modest 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is reasonable when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.1

  • China Automotive Systems, Inc. looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be almost 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 excellent in relation 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 plenty 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 looks to be very attractive. It's still top tier when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company hasn't rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up rather normal in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be more or less reasonable, but hardly cheap. It ranks similar to 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 close to average when compared 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 some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be similar to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a mediocre earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 4.7


CAAS logos

Company at a glance: China Automotive Systems, Inc. (CAAS)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Auto Parts

Market Cap: 0.24 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.40 billions

China Automotive Systems, Inc., through its subsidiaries, manufactures and sells automotive systems and components in the People's Republic of China. It produces rack and pinion power steering gears for cars and light-duty vehicles; integral power steering gears for heavy-duty vehicles; power steering parts for light duty vehicles; sensor modules; automobile steering systems and columns; and automobile electronic and hydraulic power steering systems and parts. The company also offers automotive motors and electromechanical integrated systems; polymer materials; and intelligent automotive technology research and development services. In addition, it provides after sales services, and research and development support services, as well as markets automotive parts in North America and Brazil. The company primarily sells its products to the original equipment manufacturing customers. China Automotive Systems, Inc. was incorporated in 1999 and is headquartered in Jingzhou, the People's Republic of China.

Awarener score: 5.8

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 (Very good), the business stability (Lacking) and growth (Very poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Average).