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

---

Fundamental analysis: Citizens Holding Company (CIZN)

Awarener score: 8.4

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 growth has been almost stagnant. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Citizens Holding Company business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 7.0

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

Growth score: 4.0

• Citizens Holding Company profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very weak position compared to competitors.
• There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown against comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a low pace, which compares almost average when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a very low tempo. It turns to be close to average when compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a low speed. It was slightly worse than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been very low, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a very low rhythm in past years. It's been lacking compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 7.0

• CIZN had hardly to pay income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been better than most 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: 6.8

• Citizens Holding Company usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank 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 quite good. It ranks similar to competitors.
• In the past, got barely sufficient 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: 7.0

• CIZN 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 last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
• The relationship between capital expenditures and depreciation is not known, because of not enough inputs, which is a big question mark in relation to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid excellent dividends, considering the current stock price. It came top-notch against competitors.
• In recent years, has cut back dividend payments. It could be traversing challenging times. The company has behaved in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a slight portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks somewhat better than comparable companies.
• The company usually enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a weak position compared to 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: 7.0

• Citizens Holding Company 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.
• Current ratio remains a mystery, as there was not sufficient Balance Sheet information. It turns to be unidentifiable against 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 better than most rival firms.
• Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
• Quick ratio is unavailable at this moment, due to lacking data. It's a pity we cannot compare it with peer firms.
• A conclusion on cash ratio could not be reached, as we lack inputs, which is unfortunate when trying to measure against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks more than average in relation to 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.
• 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.
• Fixed assets turnover remains undisclosed. It looks we cannot relate it to similar firms.
• Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 8.1

• Citizens Holding Company looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be similar to 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 in a very weak position compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly worse than similar companies.
• The company usually generates plenty 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 looks to be very attractive. 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 in good shape compared to peer ventures.
• The company has more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks slightly worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be attractive. It ranks similar to peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a roughly two to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks excellent 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 worse than most peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be almost average when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extreme earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be significantly undervalued. It's still close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.7

---

Awarener score: 8.4

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!