Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF)

Awarener score: 8.0

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 (Excellent), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Good).

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 extremely fast pace. It's been top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks bottom tier against rivals.

Margins score: 7.5

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

Growth score: 3.6

  • Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been impressive in relation to competitors.
  • In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an extremely fast pace, which compares top tier 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: 9.0

  • CLF managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. It's been well ranked 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: 9.5

  • Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
  • Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
  • Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown against competitors.
  • In the past, got excellent 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 similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.4

  • CLF usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is large. It stands similar to rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is great 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.
  • The company has significantly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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 close to average when 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

  • Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be weak when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be in a weak position 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 worse than most rival firms.
  • Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a very weak position compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month and a half credit. It still ranks similar to peers.
  • Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than five months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be mediocre against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers after a month and a half from the purchase. It ranks encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly three months before charging its customers, so there's sufficient money invested in working capital. It's lacking compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands mediocre against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks below average when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are somewhat low in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. The more property, plant, and equipment used, the more the company must reinvest to fight obsolescence, which usually means less available funds for the shareholders in the long run. It looks in a very weak position compared 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: 8.1

  • Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be below 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 lacking compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands mediocre 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 below average when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up lacking compared 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 looks extremely cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be very hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, a weak financial position, or that earnings aren't representative. If that isn't the case, the stock price could be extremely attractive. It ranks almost average when measured against 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 lacking compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat worse than 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 below average 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 close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.6


CLF logos

Company at a glance: Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. (CLF)

Sector, industry: Basic Materials, Steel

Market Cap: 11.28 billions

Revenues TTM: 23.29 billions

Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. operates as a flat-rolled steel producer in North America. The company offers carbon steel products, such as hot-rolled, cold-rolled, electrogalvanized, hot-dip galvanized, hot-dip galvannealed, aluminized, enameling, and advanced high-strength steel products; stainless steel products; plates; and grain oriented and non-oriented electrical steel products. It also provides tubular components, including carbon steel, stainless steel, and electric resistance welded tubing. In addition, the company offers tinplate products, such as electrolytic tin coated and chrome coated sheet, and tin mill products; tooling and sampling; raw materials; ingots, rolled blooms, and cast blooms; and hot-briquetted iron products. Further, it owns five iron ore mines in Minnesota and Michigan. The company serves automotive, infrastructure and manufacturing, distributors and converters, and steel producers. Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. was formerly known as Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. and changed its name to Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. in August 2017. The company was founded in 1847 and is headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio.

Awarener score: 8.0

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 (Excellent), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Good).