Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: The Carlyle Group Inc. (CG)

Awarener score: 8.0

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

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 extremely fast pace. It's been more than average in relation to peer companies.
  • The Carlyle Group Inc. business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 7.2

  • CG profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually destitute. They stand bottom tier against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be hardly sufficient. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually excellent. They remain close to average when compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be excellent in relation to total revenues. They're still slightly worse than 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 excellent when confronted to sales. Company stands weak when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 4.6

  • The Carlyle Group Inc. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
  • There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an extremely fast pace, which compares top tier when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at an extremely fast tempo. It turns to be impressive in relation 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: 6.0

  • CG had to pay sparse income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse than 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: 8.8

  • The Carlyle Group Inc. usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to 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.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks great when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got very good 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 similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.0

  • CG usually uses a modest portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments isn't too high. It stands similar to rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid good dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat worse than competitors.
  • Has somewhat increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved rather normal in relation to similar firms.
  • The company usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to pay dividends. Dividend payments should be safe, unless business prospects are challenged. Sustainability looks slightly better than 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 a disappointment 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 close to average when compared to rivals.
  • The company uses a significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn sour. It still looks almost average when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.5

  • The Carlyle Group Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be weak 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 lacking compared 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 somewhat better than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks below average 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.
  • Net interest expenses consume a non-significant portion of usual business earnings, and are therefore extremely easily to bear. It stands well ranked against rival firms.
  • There is insufficient data to conclude on the relationship of EBITDA and debt for this company. It ranks unknown against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are very good in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. Low property, plant, and equipment requirements allows the company to keep more money to reward stockholders in the long run. It looks close to average when compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.9

  • The Carlyle Group Inc. looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation to 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 extraordinary free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat better than similar companies.
  • The company usually generates more than enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Surplus cash may be used to repay loans, to eventually buy new businesses, or to reward investors. Considering the financial position and stock price, at the current price the share might be interesting. It's still below average when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up lacking compared to peer ventures.
  • The company has substantial more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks slightly better than 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 top tier 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 a slight improvement compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is somewhat high. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains slightly 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 more than average in relation to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extreme earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be significantly undervalued. It's still rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.4


CG logos

Company at a glance: The Carlyle Group Inc. (CG)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Asset Management

Market Cap: 12.88 billions

Revenues TTM: 4.29 billions

The Carlyle Group Inc. is an investment firm specializing in direct and fund of fund investments. Within direct investments, it specializes in management-led/ Leveraged buyouts, privatizations, divestitures, strategic minority equity investments, structured credit, global distressed and corporate opportunities, small and middle market, equity private placements, consolidations and buildups, senior debt, mezzanine and leveraged finance, and venture and growth capital financings, seed/startup, early venture, emerging growth, turnaround, mid venture, late venture, PIPES. The firm invests across four segments which include Corporate Private Equity, Real Assets, Global Market Strategies, and Solutions. The firm typically invests in industrial, agribusiness, ecological sector, fintech, airports, parking, Plastics, Rubber, diversified natural resources, minerals, farming, aerospace, defense, automotive, consumer, retail, industrial, infrastructure, energy, power, healthcare, software, software enabled services, semiconductors, communications infrastructure, financial technology, utilities, gaming, systems and related supply chain, electronic systems, systems, oil and gas, processing facilities, power generation assets, technology, systems, real estate, financial services, transportation, business services, telecommunications, media, and logistics sectors. Within the industrial sector, the firm invests in manufacturing, building products, packaging, chemicals, metals and mining, forestry and paper products, and industrial consumables and services. In consumer and retail sectors, it invests in food and beverage, retail, restaurants, consumer products, domestic consumption, consumer services, personal care products, direct marketing, and education. Within aerospace, defense, business services, and government services sectors, it seeks to invest in defense electronics, manufacturing and services, government contracting and services, information technology, distribution companies. In telecommunication and media sectors, it invests in cable TV, directories, publishing, entertainment and content delivery services, wireless infrastructure/services, fixed line networks, satellite services, broadband and Internet, and infrastructure. Within real estate, the firm invests in office, hotel, industrial, retail, for sale residential, student housing, hospitality, multifamily residential, homebuilding and building products, and senior living sectors. The firm seeks to make investments in growing business including those with overleveraged balance sheets. The firm seeks to hold its investments for four to six years. In the healthcare sector, it invests in healthcare services, outsourcing services, companies running clinical trials for pharmaceutical companies, managed care, pharmaceuticals, pharmaceutical related services, healthcare IT, medical, products, and devices. It seeks to invest in companies based in Sub-Saharan focusing on Ghana, Kenya, Mozambique, Botswana, Nigeria, Uganda, West Africa, North Africa and South Africa focusing on Tanzania and Zambia; Asia focusing on Pakistan, India, South East Asia, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Korea, and Japan; Australia; New Zealand; Europe focusing on France, Italy, Denmark, United Kingdom, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Benelux , Sweden, Switzerland, Hungary, Poland, and Russia; Middle East focusing on Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and UAE; North America focusing on United States which further invest in Southeastern United States, Texas, Boston, San Francisco Bay Area and Pacific Northwest; Asia Pacific; Soviet Union, Central-Eastern Europe, and Israel; Nordic region; and South America focusing on Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Peru. The firm seeks to invest in food, financial, and healthcare industries in Western China. In the real estate sector, the firm seeks to invest in various locations across Europe focusing on France and Central Europe, United States, Asia focusing on China, and Latin America. It typically invests between $1 million and $50 million for venture investments and between $50 million and $2 billion for buyouts in companies with enterprise value of between $31.57 million and $1000 million and sales value of $10 million and $500 million. It seeks to invest in companies with market capitalization greater than $50 million and EBITDA between $5 million to $25 million. It prefers to take a majority or a minority stake. It typically holds its investments for three to five years. Within automotive and transportation sectors, the firm seeks to hold its investments in for four to six years. While investing in Japan, it does not invest in companies with more than 1,000 employees and prefers companies' worth between $100 million and $150 million. The firm originates, structures, and acts as lead equity investor in the transactions. The Carlyle Group Inc. was founded in 1987 and is based in Washington, District of Columbia with additional offices in 21 countries across 5 continents (North America, South America, Asia, Australia and Europe).

Awarener score: 8.0

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