Fundamental analysis: Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO)

Awarener score: 3.9

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

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: 3.5

Business has been shrinking at a fast pace. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 4.7

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

Growth score: 1.4

Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been lacking 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

CCO 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: 5.0

Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 2.3

CCO 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 replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is similar to industry peers.
In the past twelve months the stock paid no dividends. It came bottom tier against competitors.
Has stopped or virtually stopped paying dividends. Unless they were a special one-shot payment, the company could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved in a 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 usually enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains close to average when 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: 3.8

Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. has not disclosed intangibles assets, so we could not reach a meaningful conclusion on this metric. It happens to be a not known variable when measured with 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 in a 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 bottom tier against rival firms.
Most 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 roughly another 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 few cents of cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat worse than peers.
On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks weak 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 a very weak position compared 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 earnings have usually been extremely low when measured against loans taken. Even severely cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than twenty years to repay the obligations. Additional stockholders' funding may be a quicker way, but at the cost of increasing the mouths to feed on the eventual pie of profits. 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 a disappointment 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 worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.5

Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
In the past twelve months, the company neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could generate, it reinvested in the business, which stands slightly worse than similar companies.
In the past years the company hardly generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve enough to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still weak when measured 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 rather normal in relation 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 low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks in good shape compared to rival firms.
There's no accounting equity, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains bottom tier against peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business earned little 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 somewhat low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.1

Company at a glance: Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. (CCO)

Sector, industry: Communication Services, Advertising Agencies

Market Cap: 0.66 billions

Revenues TTM: 2.48 billions

Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. owns, operates, and sells advertising displays in the United States and internationally. It operates through two segments, Americas and Europe. The company offers advertising services through billboards, including bulletins and posters; transit displays, which are advertising surfaces on various types of vehicles or within transit systems; street furniture displays, such as advertising surfaces on bus shelters, information kiosks, freestanding units, and other public structures; spectaculars, which are customized display structures that incorporate videos, multidimensional lettering and figures, mechanical devices and moving parts, and other embellishments; wallscape, a display that drapes over or is suspended from the sides of buildings or other structures. It also provides street furniture equipment, cleaning and maintenance services, operation of public bike programs, and production services; and a public bicycle rental program, which offers bicycles for rent to the general public in various municipalities. As of December 31, 2021, it owned or operated approximately 69,000 advertising displays in the Americas; and 430,000 advertising displays in Europe. The company was formerly known as Eller Media Company and changed its name to Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. in August 2005. Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. was founded in 1901 and is headquartered in San Antonio, Texas.