Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: CDW Corporation (CDW)

Awarener score: 7.4

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 (Good), the business stability (Excellent) and growth (Average), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Excellent).

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: 7.5

  • Business has been growing at a low pace. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • CDW Corporation business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 5.5

  • CDW profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very poor. They stand mediocre against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be good. It's similar to competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually hardly sufficient. They remain close to average when compared 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 similar to rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be sufficient when confronted to sales. Company stands encouraging in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 5.0

  • CDW Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been close to average when 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 lacking compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a low speed. It was slightly better than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been very low, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a low rhythm in past years. It's been rather normal in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 5.0

  • CDW had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly worse than 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: 10.0

  • CDW Corporation usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves great when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets huge proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain impressive in relation to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks top tier 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.9

  • CDW usually uses a slight portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is light. It stands great when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing part of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping some funds for something else. It can't keep forever, which is weak when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly worse than competitors.
  • Has significantly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects probably have improved. The company has behaved a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and should be reasonable safe. Sustainability looks well ranked against comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive in relation to peer enterprises.
  • Repurchase effectiveness metric is very complex. Run again in analytical mode if you 're interested in a technical explanation. It stands excellent in relation to rivals.
  • The company uses a significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn sour. It still looks below average when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.3

  • CDW Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a huge 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 last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has somewhat more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns might not be that important. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks almost 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 very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as lacking compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be mediocre against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers longer than two months after the purchase. It ranks great when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers less than one month before charging its customers, so there's little money invested in working capital. It's a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands slightly worse than 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.
  • Revenues are huge 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 impressive in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is huge considering yearly sales, which is great. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.2

  • CDW Corporation looks very expensive 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 free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly 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 similar to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up impressive in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is high. Substantial improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is somewhat risky. It ranks encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a more than one-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 extremely high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains worse than most 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 encouraging in relation to 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 a slight improvement compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.3


CDW logos

Company at a glance: CDW Corporation (CDW)

Sector, industry: Technology, Information Technology Services

Market Cap: 25.31 billions

Revenues TTM: 23.85 billions

CDW Corporation provides information technology (IT) solutions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. It operates through three segments: Corporate, Small Business, and Public. The company offers discrete hardware and software products and services, as well as integrated IT solutions, including on-premise, hybrid, and cloud capabilities across data center and networking, digital workspace, and security. Its hardware products comprise notebooks/mobile devices, network communications, desktop computers, video monitors, enterprise and data storage, and others; and software products consists of application suites, security, virtualization, operating systems, and network management. The company also provides advisory and design, software development, implementation, managed, professional, configuration, and telecom services, as well as warranties; mission critical software, systems, and network solutions; and implementation and installation, and repair services to its customers through various third-party service providers. It serves government, education, and healthcare customers; and small, medium, and large business customers. The company was founded in 1984 and is headquartered in Vernon Hills, Illinois.

Awarener score: 7.4

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 (Good), the business stability (Excellent) and growth (Average), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Excellent).