Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Permian Resources Corporation (CDEV)

Awarener score: 4.2

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 (Lacking) and growth (Average), 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: 5.0

  • Business has been growing at a low pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
  • Permian Resources Corporation business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks slightly better than rivals.

Margins score: 5.8

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

Growth score: 1.7

  • Permian Resources Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been rather normal in relation 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

  • CDEV 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

  • Permian Resources Corporation usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain close to average when compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually modest. It ranks similar to 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 similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.5

  • CDEV usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is rather normal. It stands similar 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 weak when measured against 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 close to average when 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: 5.8

  • Permian Resources Corporation has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some 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 substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of 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 slightly worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks more than average in relation to peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be well ranked against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks below average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company charges its customers long before it must pay its suppliers, so the more it sales, the more free funds it gets. It's close to average when compared 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 reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks below average when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Last twelve months revenues were non-significant in relation to fixed assets. The company must improve income to take advantage of used resources. It looks in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.6

  • Permian Resources Corporation looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be almost average 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 impressive in relation to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat better than similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes 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 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 lacking compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks somewhat worse than 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 similar to peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a three or four to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks rather normal 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 top-notch against 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 encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a mediocre 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: 4.4


CDEV logos

Company at a glance: Permian Resources Corporation (CDEV)

Sector, industry: Energy, Oil & Gas E&P

Market Cap: 2.17 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.95 billions

Centennial Resource Development, Inc., an independent oil and natural gas company, focuses on the development of crude oil and related liquids-rich natural gas reserves in the United States. Its assets primarily focus on the Delaware Basin, a sub-basin of the Permian Basin. The company's properties consist of acreage blocks primarily in Reeves County, West Texas and Lea County, New Mexico. As of December 31, 2021, it leased or acquired approximately 73,675 net acres; and owned 991 net mineral acres in the Delaware Basin. The company was formerly known as Silver Run Acquisition Corporation and changed its name to Centennial Resource Development, Inc. in October 2016. The company was incorporated in 2015 and is headquartered in Denver, Colorado.

Awarener score: 4.2

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 (Lacking) and growth (Average), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).