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

---

Fundamental analysis: Cadre Holdings, Inc. (CDRE)

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: a result could not be reached

• Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
• Cadre Holdings, Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 6.3

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

Growth score: could not be analyzed

• Cadre Holdings, Inc. 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.
• EBITDA growth is unknown due to insufficient inputs, which compares unknown against peer enterprises.
• We were not able to provide an estimate for EBIT growth, because of lacking data. It turns to be not yet known in relation to similar stocks.
• Profit before income tax growth was not estimated, on insufficient history. It was impossible to measure against rivals.
• Net income growth could not be estimated, and so it is unknown against peer companies.
• There was not enough input data to estimate EPS trend. It's been an impossibility to compare it with industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 10.0

• CDRE managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been better 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: 7.5

• Cadre Holdings, Inc. usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain rather normal in relation to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks almost average when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got very good 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.3

• CDRE usually uses a modest portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments isn't too high. It stands encouraging in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid run-of-the-mill dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly better than competitors.
• Has recently started or restarted paying dividends to stockholders. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved impressive in relation to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a slight portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks better than most 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 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 rather normal in relation to rivals.
• We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.1

• Cadre Holdings, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be significant difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be weak when measured against peer companies.
• The company has roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• A significant part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have almost as many claims on the company as shareholders. 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 almost 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 a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
• Normally has approximately three months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a slight improvement compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
• On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers four months or more before charging its customers, so there's significant money invested in working capital. It's a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands somewhat worse than rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been quite good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take around three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are very good 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 excellent in relation to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is excellent when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.7

• Cadre Holdings, Inc. profits are really small compared to market valuation, market valuation doesn't rely on current earnings. It happens to be substantially worse 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 in a very weak position compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most similar companies.
• The company usually generates much more 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, at the current price the share might be very interesting. It's still great 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 in a very weak position compared 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 somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is huge, as profits were extremely low in relative terms. It ranks substantially worse 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 a slight improvement 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 lost a little money. 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 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: 6.7

---

Awarener score: 6.6

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!