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

---

Fundamental analysis: Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. (CFR)

Awarener score: 5.2

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: 5.5

• Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
• Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 8.0

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

Growth score: 6.9

• Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been impressive in relation to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at an extremely fast step, which has been top-notch against comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a normal pace, which compares more than average in relation to peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a normal tempo. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a normal speed. It was slightly better than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been low, and similar to 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: 9.0

• CFR managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. It's been top-notch 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: 6.8

• Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in good shape compared to similar companies.
• There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks great when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got barely sufficient 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.2

• CFR 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 substantially worse when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually 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 it paid very little dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
• In recent years, has greatly cut back dividend payments. It could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved a disappointment compared to similar firms.
• The company generates very few genuine funds. Dividend payments are usually on borrowed money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, future payments could be at risk. Sustainability looks bottom tier against comparable companies.
• The company usually neither enlarges nor reduces the pool of investors, resulting in approximately the same mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains rather normal 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 weak position compared to rivals.
• The company generates very few genuine funds. Investor rewards must be paid burning existing cash or by borrowing money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, stockholder compensation could be at risk. It still looks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.5

• Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some 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 plenty short-term resources to face short-term obligations. There're no liquidity concerns. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Almost no resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is great. Company could significantly increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains better than most rival firms.
• Most controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks great when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has plenty of 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 plenty of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on many months credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
• Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
• We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
• Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
• Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against 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 earnings have usually been great when measured against loans taken. Debt might be repaid almost as soon as desired. It ranks top tier when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are 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 a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.0

• Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. has an unknown adjusted Price-to-Earnings ratio, so we cannot comment on that. It happens to be a necessary comparison 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.
• There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
• Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. It came up in a weak position compared to peer ventures.
• We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks below average when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a weak position 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 worse than most peer firms.
• We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
• An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 6.4

---

Awarener score: 5.2

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!