Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Codexis, Inc. (CDXS)

Awarener score: 4.5

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 (Very good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).

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: 6.0

  • Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Codexis, Inc. business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 4.2

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

Growth score: 2.0

  • Codexis, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been close to average when 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: 3.3

  • CDXS had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume quite a bit of revenues. It's top tier when measured against competitors.
  • The company grows sparsely in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a slight improvement compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.0

  • Codexis, Inc. usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves great when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets meagre proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually little profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got meagre 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: 3.2

  • CDXS 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 great when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is similar to 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 significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent 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 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: 5.9

  • Codexis, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a non-significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is safer. It happens to be weak when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely irrelevant. It turns to be lacking 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.
  • Most resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is best for liquidity. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has abundant dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as excellent in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month from the purchase. It ranks substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly three months before charging its customers, so there's sufficient money invested in working capital. It's lacking compared to similar companies.
  • Company earns net interest income on its investments and therefore is in a quite comfortable financial position. It stands top-notch 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are somewhat low 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 in good shape compared 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: 3.7

  • Codexis, 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 in a weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could get, it reinvested in the business, which stands better than most 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 great when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has 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 somewhat more stockholders. It came up in good shape compared to peer ventures.
  • The company has neither net debt nor net cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks worse than most 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 high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in good shape compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is 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 some money. It happens to be great 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 impressive in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 3.9


CDXS logos

Company at a glance: Codexis, Inc. (CDXS)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: 0.40 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.14 billions

Codexis, Inc. discovers, develops, and sells enzymes and other proteins. It offers biocatalyst products and services; intermediate chemicals products that are used for further chemical processing; and Codex biocatalyst panels and kits that enable customers to perform chemistry screening. The company also provides biocatalyst screening and protein engineering services. In addition, it offers CodeEvolver protein engineering technology platform, which helps in developing and delivering biocatalysts that perform chemical transformations and enhance the efficiency and productivity of manufacturing processes. The company's platform is also used to discover novel biotherapeutic drug candidates for targeted human diseases, as well as for molecular biology and in vitro diagnostic enzymes. It sells its products to pharmaceutical manufacturers through its direct sales and business development force in the United States and Europe. The company was incorporated in 2002 and is headquartered in Redwood City, California.

Awarener score: 4.5

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 (Very good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).