• Twitter
• Facebook
• Snapchat
• Pinterest
• LinkedIn
• Tumblr

---

Fundamental analysis: California BanCorp (CALB)

Awarener score: 6.6

Conclusion

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: 8.0

• Business has been growing at a good pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
• California BanCorp business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 6.8

• CALB profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually destitute. They stand bottom tier against 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 excellent. They remain in a very weak position compared to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be excellent in relation to total revenues. They're still worse than most similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually excellent considering total sales, and remain substantially worse when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be excellent when confronted to sales. Company stands substantially worse when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 8.2

• California BanCorp 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.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a good pace, which compares great when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a good tempo. It turns to be excellent in relation to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an excellent speed. It was top-notch against rivals.
• In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been excellent, and top tier when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at an excellent rhythm in past years. It's been impressive in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

• CALB had to pay a lot of income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been worse than most 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: 6.0

• California BanCorp usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
• There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.8

• CALB 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 substantially worse when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation 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 enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a weak position 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: 5.4

• California BanCorp intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is mostly safe. It happens to be similar to 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 better than most rival firms.
• Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks weak 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 many months credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
• Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
• We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
• Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
• Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against 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.
• 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.
• Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.4

• California BanCorp 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 in good shape 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 slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. It came up in a weak position compared 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 looks 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 attractive. It ranks similar to 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 excellent in relation 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 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: 6.1

---

Awarener score: 6.6

Conclusion

Support us!

We are an independent project. No ads, no suscription, no registration required.

• Donate!