Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Century Aluminum Company (CENX)

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 (Good), 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: 5.5

  • Business has been growing at a good pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
  • Century Aluminum Company business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 3.7

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

Growth score: 1.0

  • Century Aluminum Company couldn't always profit -on goods and services sold- in the past years. It's been a disappointment 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: 1.0

  • CENX 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: 4.0

  • Century Aluminum Company usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets low proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually lacking. It ranks substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got low 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.2

  • CENX usually uses almost all genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is huge. It stands weak when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing most of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, and saving a little funds for something else, 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 somewhat enlarges 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.
  • 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: 5.5

  • Century Aluminum Company 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 double short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are normally not an issue. It turns to be a disappointment 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 mediocre against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks encouraging in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment 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 less than a month credit. It still ranks great when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as lacking compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less 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 weak when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's a slight improvement 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 earnings have usually been low when measured against loans taken. Even cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than seven years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks substantially worse 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 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: 6.6

  • Century Aluminum Company looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. 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 close to average when compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat worse 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 mediocre against 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 last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks excellent in relation to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be below average when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a somewhat low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.8


CENX logos

Company at a glance: Century Aluminum Company (CENX)

Sector, industry: Basic Materials, Aluminum

Market Cap: 0.74 billions

Revenues TTM: 2.91 billions

Century Aluminum Company, together with its subsidiaries, produces standard-grade and value-added primary aluminum products in the United States and Iceland. It also owns and operates a carbon anode production facility in the Netherlands. The company was incorporated in 1981 and is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.

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 (Good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).