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

---

Fundamental analysis: Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. (CHKP)

Awarener score: 7.7

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: 6.5

• Business has been shrinking. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
• Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. business trend is extremely stable, which is best. It looks top-notch against rivals.

Margins score: 9.8

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

Growth score: 2.3

• Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been in a weak position compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been shrinking, which has been worse than most comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- tended to shrink, which compares substantially worse when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tended to shrink. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- tended to shrink. It was worse than most rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been negative, and substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have been almost stagnant in past years. It's been in a weak position compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 6.3

• CHKP managed to pay little to no income taxes on profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better than peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a low portion of revenues. It's great when measured against competitors.
• The company grows very little in relation to research and development efforts. It stands in a weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 10.0

• Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves top tier when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets huge proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain impressive in relation to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks top tier when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got huge 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 top tier when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.2

• CHKP usually uses a slight portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is light. It stands top tier when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping its operating capabilities up to date, which is encouraging in relation to 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 usually significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive 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 impressive in relation to rivals.
• The company uses somewhat more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so some part of them is paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business somewhat improves, or rewards will probably not be sustained at this pace. It still looks weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.2

• Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent some 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 similar to peer companies.
• The company has somewhat more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns might not be that important. It turns to be lacking compared to similar firms.
• All resources are company owned, with virtually no financial debt. Financial position is outstanding. The company could significantly borrow money if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains top-notch against rival firms.
• Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks almost average when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough 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 roughly another of cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes less than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
• Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers roughly two months before charging its customers, so there's some money invested in working capital. It's lacking compared to 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.
• There is insufficient data to conclude on the relationship of EBITDA and debt for this company. It ranks unknown against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are huge 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 excellent in relation 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 somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.4

• Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. looks reasonable in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be top tier 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands top-notch against similar companies.
• The company usually generates much more 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 very interesting. It's still top tier when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up excellent in relation 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 better than most similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is somewhat high. Improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which presents some risks. It ranks more than average in relation to peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very large relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks in a weak position compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly worse than peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned good money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be top tier when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an excellent earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be undervalued. It's still impressive in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.7

---

Awarener score: 7.7

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!