Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Clovis Oncology, Inc. (CLVS)

Awarener score: 2.5

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 (Bottom), the business stability (Poor) and growth (Average), 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: 4.5

  • Business has been growing at a low pace. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Clovis Oncology, Inc. business varies, ups and downs are rather normal. Risk is sufficient. It looks well ranked against rivals.

Margins score: 3.2

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

Growth score: 1.4

  • Clovis Oncology, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been in a weak position compared 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: 2.3

  • CLVS had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a substantial portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
  • The company hardly grows despite of research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.5

  • Clovis Oncology, Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against 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 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.0

  • CLVS 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 below average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually heavily investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is great when measured against industry peers.
  • There was no available information regarding dividend yield. It came unknown 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 rather normal 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 a very weak position 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: 3.8

  • Clovis Oncology, Inc. has not disclosed intangibles assets, so we could not reach a meaningful conclusion on this metric. It happens to be a not known variable when measured with peer companies.
  • The company has lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might be liquidity concerns. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • Most resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have more claims on the company than shareholders. Unless the company is a financial institution that takes deposits, the situation might be very risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment 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 slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a slight improvement compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than six months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers almost when charging its customers, so there's very little money invested in working capital. It's close to average when compared to 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.
  • Revenues are reasonable 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 excellent in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still better than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.1

  • Clovis Oncology, 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 impressive in relation to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed lots of funds. Either it reinvested heavily in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes plenty 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 outstanding business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still weak when measured 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.
  • We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding 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 great when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks impressive in relation to rival firms.
  • The stock price is significantly below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is extremely low, the stock may be selling at a large discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains top-notch against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a lot of money. 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 extremely low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is significantly in dispute. It's still lacking compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.2


CLVS logos

Company at a glance: Clovis Oncology, Inc. (CLVS)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Biotechnology

Market Cap: unavailable

Revenues TTM: 0.10 billions

Clovis Oncology, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on acquiring, developing, and commercializing anti-cancer agents in the United States, Europe, and internationally. In the U.S., the company offers Rubraca (rucaparib), an oral small molecule inhibitor of poly ADP-ribose polymerase for recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, as well as for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. In Europe, the company offers Rubraca for recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. It is also developing lucitanib, an investigational angiogenesis inhibitor, which inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1 through 3 (VEGFR 1-3), platelet-derived growth factor receptors alpha and beta (PDGFRa/ß), and fibroblast growth factor receptors 1 through 3 (FGFR 1-3);and FAP-2286, an investigational peptide-targeted radionuclide therapy and imaging agent targeting fibroblast activation protein. In addition, the company sells its Rubraca through a limited number of specialty distributor and specialty pharmacy providers, who subsequently sells Rubraca to patients and health care providers. Clovis Oncology, Inc. has license agreements with Pfizer Inc., AstraZeneca UK Limited, Advenchen Laboratories LLC, and 3B Pharmaceuticals GmbH, a clinical collaboration with Bristol Myers Squibb Company; and a partnership with Foundation Medicine, Inc. Clovis Oncology, Inc. was incorporated in 2009 and is headquartered in Boulder, Colorado. On December 11, 2022, Clovis Oncology, Inc., along with its affiliates, filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under Chapter 11 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.

Awarener score: 2.5

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 (Bottom), the business stability (Poor) and growth (Average), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (unknown).