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

---

Fundamental analysis: Carrier Global Corporation (CARR)

Awarener score: 6.8

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: 4.0

• Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
• Carrier Global Corporation business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 7.3

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

Growth score: 5.1

• Carrier Global Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a good pace. It's been a slight improvement compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a low step, which has been slightly worse than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a low pace, which compares below average when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a slow tempo. It turns to be close to average when compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a very low speed. It was slightly worse than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been low, and below average when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a low rhythm in past years. It's been lacking compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 7.3

• CARR had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better than peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a very little portion of revenues. It's below average when measured against competitors.
• The company shows good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands in a very weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 10.0

• Carrier Global Corporation usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets huge proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in good shape compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks great when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got huge 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.9

• CARR usually uses a sparse portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is modest. It stands more than average in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping its operating capabilities up to date, which is encouraging in relation to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low 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 in good shape compared to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and should be reasonable safe. Sustainability looks slightly better than 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 lacking 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 moderate portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn very sour. It still looks encouraging in relation to competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.4

• Carrier Global Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very large portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major 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 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.
• Roughly a third of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have claims on the company. It remains slightly worse than rival firms.
• Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks below average when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's close to average when compared 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 slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately three months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be mediocre against peers.
• On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. 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 in good shape compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a slight portion of usual business earnings, and are very easily bearable. It stands somewhat better than rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are quite good 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 a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is quite good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.0

• Carrier Global Corporation looks reasonable in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be similar 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat worse than similar companies.
• The company usually generates reasonably more than enough 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, the current valuation might be fair. It's still below average when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up rather normal in relation to peer ventures.
• The company has barely more debt than cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks slightly better than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be more or less reasonable, but hardly cheap. It ranks almost average when measured against 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 in a weak position compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains mediocre against peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned good money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be almost average when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a very good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.5

---

Awarener score: 6.8

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!