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

---

Fundamental analysis: Ciena Corporation (CIEN)

Awarener score: 7.1

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 slightly shrinking. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Ciena Corporation business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 7.0

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

Growth score: 4.7

• Ciena Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been close to average when compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very low step, which has been somewhat worse than comparable firms.
• Profits growth -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been almost stagnant, which compares weak when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a slow tempo. It turns to be lacking compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a low 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 normal rhythm in past years. It's been rather normal in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 6.0

• CIEN managed to pay little to no income taxes on profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat better than peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a moderate portion of revenues. It's below average when measured against competitors.
• The company grows very little in relation to research and development efforts. It stands lacking compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 8.2

• Ciena Corporation usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves great when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
• There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.8

• CIEN usually uses a significant portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is abundant. It stands great 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 reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent 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 in good shape 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: 5.1

• Ciena Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest 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 more than enough short-term resources to face short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are non-significant. It turns to be in good shape compared to similar firms.
• Roughly a third of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have claims on the company. It remains mediocre against rival firms.
• Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. It looks encouraging in relation to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in 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 another of cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a very weak position compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
• On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks similar to industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers six months or more before charging its customers, so there's abundant money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands slightly worse than rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks almost 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 impressive in relation 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 somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.5

• Ciena Corporation looks heavily expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be weak 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 close to average when compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly 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 encouraging in relation to 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 in good shape compared to peer ventures.
• The company has barely more debt than cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is very high. A lot of improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is risky. It ranks below average when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a three or four to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a weak position compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is 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 earned little 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 good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.1

---

Awarener score: 7.1

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!