Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: ContraFect Corporation (CFRX)

Awarener score: 3.0

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (unknown) and growth (unknown), 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: a result could not be reached

  • Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
  • ContraFect Corporation business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 2.5

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

Growth score: 1.0

  • ContraFect Corporation has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare 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

  • CFRX 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 a huge portion of revenues. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • We have insufficient data to estimate how effective is research and development effort. It stands unknown against rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.0

  • ContraFect Corporation usually gets pauper returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
  • Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
  • Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 1.6

  • CFRX 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 sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, 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 has heavily 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: 4.8

  • ContraFect Corporation has not disclosed intangibles assets, so we could not reach a meaningful conclusion on this metric. It happens to be a not known variable when measured with peer companies.
  • The company has somewhat lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some liquidity concerns. 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 somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • A substantial portion of resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is better for liquidity. It looks below average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks more than average in relation to 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.
  • 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 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 slightly low when yearly sales are considered, business volume should be increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.5

  • ContraFect Corporation 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 a disappointment 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 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 rather normal in relation 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 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 not far from one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks impressive in relation to rival firms.
  • There's no accounting equity, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains bottom tier against 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: 2.1


CFRX logos

Company at a glance: ContraFect Corporation (CFRX)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: 0.01 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.01 billions

ContraFect Corporation, a clinical-stage biotechnology company, discovers and develops therapeutic protein and antibody products for the treatment of life-threatening and drug-resistant infectious diseases in the United States. Its lead program includes Exebacase, a lysin, which is in Phase III clinical trials for the treatment of staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. The company also develops CF-296, an engineered lysin, used for treatment of the invasive infections caused by staphylococcus aureus including biofilm-related infections in prosthetic joints and indwelling devices and osteomyelitis; and CF-370, an investigational anti-bacterial therapeutic candidate, which is in Phase 1 clinical trials to treat pseudomonas aeruginosa infections, such as ventilator associated pneumonia, blood stream infections, complicated urinary tract infections, and surgery carry infections. It also initiated an expanded access program to provide Exebacase for the treatment of persistent bacteremia caused by methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus in COVID-19 patients. The company has a license agreement with The Rockefeller University to identify novel lysin therapeutic candidates targeting gram-negative pathogens. ContraFect Corporation was incorporated in 2008 and is headquartered in Yonkers, New York.

Awarener score: 3.0

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (unknown) and growth (unknown), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Poor).