Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Carnival Corporation & plc (CCL)

Awarener score: 4.0

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 (Very poor), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).

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: 5.5

  • Business has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Carnival Corporation & plc business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks mediocre against rivals.

Margins score: 1.8

  • CCL profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually destitute. They stand worse than most rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be extremely poor. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually extremely poor. They remain in a very weak position compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be extremely poor in relation to total revenues. They're still worse than most similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually extremely poor considering total sales, and remain substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be extremely poor when confronted to sales. Company stands substantially worse when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

  • Carnival Corporation & plc couldn't always profit -on goods and services sold- in the past years. It's been a disappointment 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

  • CCL 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: 3.8

  • Carnival Corporation & plc usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets low proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks almost average when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got low 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.0

  • CCL 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 almost average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand 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.
  • In recent years, has greatly cut back dividend payments. It could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved in a very weak position 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 has significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a very weak position 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: 4.6

  • Carnival Corporation & plc intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • The company has lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might be liquidity concerns. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Most resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have more claims on the company than shareholders. Unless the company is a financial institution that takes deposits, the situation might be very risky. It remains worse than most rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a weak position compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks great when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers after a month and a half from the purchase. It ranks below average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers almost when charging its customers, so there's very little money invested in working capital. It's rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • Has usually been losing money on the business, so net interest expenses must be paid by increasing borrowings, which is unsustainable in the long run. The situation is very risky for both creditors and shareholders, profitability must increase. It stands bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Business has usually been operated at a loss. Unless prospects improve, the company is no position to decrease loans taken levels but by additional shareholders' funding. Profitability must improve. It ranks substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • The company didn't have revenues in the past twelve months. It must start having income to take advantage of used resources. It looks a disappointment compared 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 bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.4

  • Carnival Corporation & plc reported losses, so valuating it in relation to earnings is meaningless. It happens to be last-in-rank 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands bottom tier against similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes much more funds than can genuinely generate. Business needs are meet by borrowing money or consuming preexistent cash, which can only keep up until a certain limit. Unless the company is driving significant business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still substantially worse when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has significantly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. Future profits need to be high enough to justify the measure, as the pie of earnings will now be split among numerous more stockholders. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is drowned in loans. It almost belongs more to the creditors than the stockholders. The situation may be dire. It looks bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation has been negative, as the company lost money. It ranks last-in-rank 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 lacking 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 better than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost significant money. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in a very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.0


CCL logos

Company at a glance: Carnival Corporation & plc (CCL)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Travel Services

Market Cap: 9.65 billions

Revenues TTM: 5.31 billions

Carnival Corporation & plc operates as a leisure travel company. Its ships visit approximately 700 ports under the Carnival Cruise Line, Princess Cruises, Holland America Line, P&O Cruises (Australia), Seabourn, Costa Cruises, AIDA Cruises, P&O Cruises (UK), and Cunard brand names. The company also provides port destinations and other services, as well as owns and owns and operates hotels, lodges, glass-domed railcars, and motor coaches. It sells its cruises primarily through travel agents, tour operators, vacation planners, and websites. The company operates in the United States, Canada, Continental Europe, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, Asia, and internationally. It operates 87 ships with 223,000 lower berths. Carnival Corporation & plc was founded in 1972 and is headquartered in Miami, Florida.

Awarener score: 4.0

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 (Very poor), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).