Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Capstone Green Energy Corporation (CGRN)

Awarener score: 2.0

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 (Bottom), the business stability (Good) and growth (Very poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Very 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: 4.5

  • Business has been shrinking at a fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Capstone Green Energy Corporation business trend stability is good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 3.0

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

Growth score: 1.3

  • Capstone Green Energy Corporation profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. 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: 3.3

  • CGRN 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 sparse portion of revenues. It's weak when measured against competitors.
  • Business has seen substantial shrinking, despite research and development efforts. It stands in a weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.2

  • Capstone Green Energy Corporation usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually bottom profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got meagre 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 last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.0

  • CGRN 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 last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is top tier 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 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 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: 4.7

  • Capstone Green Energy Corporation 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 more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • A very minor portion of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks top tier when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's in good shape compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as close to average when compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be bottom tier against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks top tier 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 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 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is quite good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still slightly worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.8

  • Capstone Green Energy 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 slight improvement compared 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 largely 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 a lot more stockholders. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • This company is a cash hoarder. It might be well poised to substantially increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks bottom tier against 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 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 is extremely high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains somewhat worse than 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 a disappointment compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.1


CGRN logos

Company at a glance: Capstone Green Energy Corporation (CGRN)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Specialty Industrial Machinery

Market Cap: 0.03 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.07 billions

Capstone Green Energy Corporation develops, manufactures, markets, and services microturbine technology solutions for use in stationary distributed power generation and distribution networks applications worldwide. It offers microturbines, components, and accessories for various applications, including cogeneration combined heat and power (CHP), integrated CHP, and combined cooling, heat, and power, as well as renewable energy, natural resources, and critical power supply. The company's microturbines are also used as battery charging generators for use in hybrid electric vehicles. It also provides various accessories, including rotary gas compressors with digital controls; integrated heat recovery modules for CHP applications; dual mode controllers that allow automatic transition between grid connect and stand-alone modes; batteries with digital controls for stand-alone or dual-mode operations; power servers for multipacked installations; protocol converters for Internet access; packaging options; and miscellaneous parts, such as frames, exhaust ducting, backflow dampers, and installation hardware. In addition, the company offers rental solutions and aftermarket spare parts. Further, it provides energy conversion products including hybrid energy stations, baker hughes, and industrial gas turbines; hydrogen energy solutions, such as hydrogen-based combined heat and power products; and energy storage products comprising microgrid storage systems and lithium-ion battery energy storage systems. The company markets and sells its products primarily through distributors and original equipment manufacturers. The company was formerly known as Capstone Turbine Corporation and changed its name to Capstone Green Energy Corporation in April 2021. Capstone Green Energy Corporation was founded in 1988 and is headquartered in Van Nuys, California.

Awarener score: 2.0

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