Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cingulate Inc. (CING)

Awarener score: 1.0

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (unknown) and growth (unknown), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (unknown).

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: a result could not be reached

  • Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
  • Cingulate Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: we could not reach a conclusion

  • CING usual gross margins were not estimated, due to lack of enough history. They stand unknown against rival companies.
  • We would not risk estimating the normal operating margins, because of insufficient past records. It's unidentified in relation to competitors.
  • Normal EBITDA margins remain unknown, due to not enough track records. They remain unknown against peers.
  • EBIT normal margins could not be estimated, due to not sufficient input years. They're still undisclosed compared to similar companies.
  • Usual profit margin before income taxes is still unknown, as there is not enough history to analyze, and remain therefore an impossibility to compare with rivals.
  • Due to insufficient past records, we were unable to estimate normal net profit margin. Company stands unidentified in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

  • Cingulate Inc. 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, 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: 1.0

  • CING had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against 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: 1.0

  • Cingulate Inc. usually gets pauper returns on the resources it controls. It proves substantially worse when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets extremely poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually bottom profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got pauper 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.5

  • CING remains pending of analysis regarding capital expenditures, due to data unavailable. It stands substantially worse when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is almost average 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.
  • Shares count analysis is unavailable, on lacking data. It remains we cannot compare it with peer enterprises.
  • We are not sure on the effectiveness of the company when repurchasing shares, as there were not enough numbers to crunch. It stands unidentified against rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.9

  • Cingulate Inc. 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 a lot more short-term resources than short-term obligations. There're no liquidity concerns. It turns to be rather normal in relation 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 slightly worse than rival firms.
  • Resources controlled can be quickly made into cash, which is very good for liquidity and risk. It looks below average when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has a lot of 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 a lot of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Days of sales outstanding are not known, out of lack of data. It still ranks unknown 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.
  • 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.
  • The company didn't have revenues in the past twelve months. It must start having income to take advantage of used resources. It looks a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • The firm has yet to start reporting any sales. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.4

  • Cingulate Inc. 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.
  • There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
  • Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure against industry firms.
  • A conclusion regarding usual company rewards to stockholders was impossible to reach with data available. It came up also not enough to relate to peer ventures.
  • This company is sitting in a mountain of cash. It's very well poised to substantially 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 has been negative, as the company lost money. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • Price-to-Sales ratio is currently an incognita. It looks incomparable with rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be more than reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty of money. It happens to be substantially worse 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: 3.0


CING logos

Company at a glance: Cingulate Inc. (CING)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: 0.01 billions

Revenues TTM: unavailable

Cingulate Inc., a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, focuses on the development of product candidates for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. The company's lead product candidates are CTx-1301 (dexmethylphenidate), which is in phase 3 clinical trial, and CTx-1302 (dextroamphetamine) for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders. It also focuses on developing CTx-2103 for the treatment of anxiety disorders. The company was founded in 2012 and is headquartered in Kansas City, Kansas.

Awarener score: 1.0

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 (could not be estimated), the business stability (unknown) and growth (unknown), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (unknown).