Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Caleres, Inc. (CAL)

Awarener score: 6.7

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 (Good), the business stability (Lacking) and growth (Lacking), 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: 4.0

  • Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • Caleres, Inc. business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 5.8

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

Growth score: 1.4

  • Caleres, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been in a 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.
  • 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: 1.0

  • CAL had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier 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: 4.5

  • Caleres, Inc. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks last-in-rank 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.6

  • CAL 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 last-in-rank 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 top tier when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid outstanding dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat better than competitors.
  • Has greatly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved rather normal in relation to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and shouldn't be at risk. Sustainability looks somewhat worse than comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer 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 a slight improvement compared to rivals.
  • The company uses a lot more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so they're paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business improves, or rewards won't keep at current pace. It still looks substantially worse when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.9

  • Caleres, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has somewhat lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some 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 worse than most rival firms.
  • Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks great when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a very weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than six months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks great when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly three months before charging its customers, so there's sufficient money invested in working capital. It's excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • Usual business earnings barely cover net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but hardly shareholders. Situation is risky, profitability must increase, or additional stockholders' funding will eventually be required. It stands bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been great when measured against loans taken. Debt might be repaid almost as soon as desired. It ranks below 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 in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is excellent when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still well ranked against peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.4

  • Caleres, Inc. looks cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation to 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 lacking 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 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 has significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up impressive 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 looks very cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be very attractive. It ranks great 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 in good shape compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is 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 earned great money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be great when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a somewhat low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 4.5


CAL logos

Company at a glance: Caleres, Inc. (CAL)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Footwear & Accessories

Market Cap: 0.91 billions

Revenues TTM: 2.94 billions

Caleres, Inc. engages in the retail and wholesale of footwear in the United States, Canada, China, and Guam. It operates through Famous Footwear and Brand Portfolio segments. The company offers licensed, branded, and private-label athletic, casual, and dress footwear products to women, men, and children. Its retail shoe stores provide brand name athletic, casual, and dress shoes, including Nike, Skechers, adidas, Vans, Converse, Crocs, Puma, Birkenstock, New Balance, Asics, New Balance, Under Armour, Bearpaw, Timberland, Sperry, and Dr. Martens, as well as company-owned and licensed brands, such as Dr. Scholl's Shoes, Blowfish Malibu, LifeStride, Naturalizer, Zodiac, Circus by Sam Edelman, Franco Sarto, and Ryka. The company also operates naturalizer.com, naturalizer.ca, vionicshoes.com, samedelman.com, allenedmonds.com, drschollsshoes.com, lifestride.com, francosarto.com, ryka.com, bzees.com, and zodiacshoes.com, as well as Vince.com, blowfishshoes.com, and veronicabeard.com websites. In addition, it designs, sources, manufactures, and markets footwear to retail stores, such as national chains, online retailers, department stores, mass merchandisers, independent retailers, and catalogs. Further, the company wholesales men's apparel, leather goods, and accessories under the Allen Edmonds brand; footwear for women under LifeStride brand; Italian footwear Franco Sarto brand; athletic footwear for women under the Rykä brand; women's shoe collection under the Vince brand; and women's footwear under the Bzees brand; other footwear under Zodiac brand; and women's footwear collection under Veronica Beard brand, as well as Via Spiga brand. It operates approximately 980 retail stores. The company was formerly known as Brown Shoe Company, Inc. Caleres, Inc. was founded in 1878 and is headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri.

Awarener score: 6.7

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