Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. (CEMI)

Awarener score: 2.7

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

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: 5.5

  • Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
  • Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks mediocre against rivals.

Margins score: 2.5

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

Growth score: 1.1

  • Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very weak position 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: 4.0

  • CEMI 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 some portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
  • The company grows modestly in relation to research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.2

  • Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. usually gets pauper returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually bottom profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got pauper 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 2.8

  • CEMI 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 below average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually somewhat investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation 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 has significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, 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 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: 5.4

  • Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. 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 roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be a slight improvement 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 more than average in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's rather normal in relation to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks almost average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately three months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as lacking compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than four months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat worse than peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks almost average 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 in a 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 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 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 close to average when 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 better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.5

  • Chembio Diagnostics, 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 excellent in relation to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed lots of funds. Either it reinvested heavily in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands bottom tier against similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes plenty 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 outstanding business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still last-in-rank when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has greatly 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 plenty more stockholders. It came up in a weak position compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. 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 very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks impressive 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 better than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty of money. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extremely low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is significantly in dispute. It's still in a very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.3


CEMI logos

Company at a glance: Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. (CEMI)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Diagnostics & Research

Market Cap: 0.01 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.06 billions

Chembio Diagnostics, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, develops, manufactures, and commercializes point-of-care (POC) diagnostic tests that are used to detect or diagnose diseases. The company offers tests for COVID-19, HIV and Syphilis, and Zika virus. It also develops tests for malaria, dengue, chikungunya, Chagas, ebola, leishmaniasis, lassa, marburg, leptospirosis, rickettsia, and Burkholderia diseases. The company sells its products under the STAT-PAK, SURE CHECK, STAT VIEW, and DPP trademarks, as well as sells its products directly through distributors to medical laboratories and hospitals, governmental and public health entities, non-governmental organizations, medical professionals, and retail establishments in the United States and internationally. It has collaboration agreements with Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, The Paul G. Allen Family Foundation, The Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, and the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, as well as U.S. government agencies, such as Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Chembio Diagnostics, Inc. was founded in 1985 and is headquartered in Hauppauge, New York.

Awarener score: 2.7

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