Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cigna Corporation (CI)

Awarener score: 6.8

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 (Average), the business stability (Very poor) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).

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 excellent pace. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Cigna Corporation business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks bottom tier against rivals.

Margins score: 4.8

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

Growth score: 5.3

  • Cigna 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, earnings -on operations- have been shrinking, which has been worse than most comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very good 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 rather normal in relation 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 average, and similar to peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a very low rhythm in past years. It's been rather normal in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 5.0

  • CI had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better 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: 7.8

  • Cigna Corporation usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks similar to 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.0

  • CI 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 encouraging in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing part of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping some funds for something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly worse than competitors.
  • Has greatly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved close to average when 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 significantly enlarges the pool of investors, 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 a disappointment 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: 4.9

  • Cigna Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a huge portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against 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.
  • Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month and a half 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.
  • Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands somewhat worse than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been quite good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take around three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks below average when measured 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is excellent when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.4

  • Cigna Corporation looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be almost average 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.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands bottom tier against similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes 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 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 significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up excellent in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks worse 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 low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks rather normal in relation 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 some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a very good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still a slight improvement compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.2


CI logos

Company at a glance: Cigna Corporation (CI)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Healthcare Plans

Market Cap: 89.71 billions

Revenues TTM: 179.27 billions

Cigna Corporation provides insurance and related products and services in the United States. Its Evernorth segment provides a range of coordinated and point solution health services, including pharmacy, benefits management, care delivery and management, and intelligence solutions to health plans, employers, government organizations, and health care providers. The company's Cigna Healthcare segment offers medical, pharmacy, behavioral health, dental, vision, health advocacy programs, and other products and services for insured and self-insured customers; Medicare Advantage, Medicare Supplement, and Medicare Part D plans for seniors, as well as individual health insurance plans to on and off the public exchanges; and health care coverage in its international markets, as well as health care benefits for mobile individuals and employees of multinational organizations. The company also offers permanent insurance contracts sold to corporations to provide coverage on the lives of certain employees for financing employer-paid future benefit obligations. It distributes its products and services through insurance brokers and consultants; directly to employers, unions and other groups, or individuals; and private and public exchanges. The company was founded in 1792 and is headquartered in Bloomfield, Connecticut.

Awarener score: 6.8

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 (Average), the business stability (Very poor) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).