Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Calyxt, Inc. (CLXT)

Awarener score: 3.0

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

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.
  • Calyxt, Inc. business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks bottom tier against rivals.

Margins score: 1.2

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

Growth score: 1.0

  • Calyxt, Inc. couldn't always profit -on goods and services sold- in the past years. It's been a disappointment 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: 4.0

  • CLXT 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 last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
  • The company shows good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands lacking compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.8

  • Calyxt, Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very 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 last-in-rank when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got very poor 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: 3.0

  • CLXT 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 last-in-rank when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually somewhat 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.
  • The company usually significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a weak position 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 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: 5.9

  • Calyxt, 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 roughly double short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are normally not an issue. It turns to be lacking 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 can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks similar to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's excellent in relation to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is better than most similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on cash. It still ranks top tier when measured against peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less than one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be top-notch against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks great when measured against industry peers.
  • The company charges its customers long before it must pay its suppliers, so the more it sales, the more free funds it gets. It's impressive in relation 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.
  • 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.
  • Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.4

  • Calyxt, 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands worse than most 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 last-in-rank when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has largely enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. Future profits need to be high enough to justify the measure, as the pie of earnings will now be split among a lot more stockholders. It came up in a very weak position compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is drowned in loans. It almost belongs more to the creditors than the stockholders. The situation may be dire. It looks bottom tier against 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.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very large relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks a disappointment compared 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 slightly worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a lot of money. It happens to be last-in-rank 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: 3.1


CLXT logos

Company at a glance: Calyxt, Inc. (CLXT)

Sector, industry: Consumer Defensive, Packaged Foods

Market Cap: 0.02 billions

Revenues TTM: unavailable

Calyxt, Inc., a synthetic biology company, engages in delivering plant-based solutions primarily to the agriculture end market in the United States. The company is involved in the development of improved digestibility alfalfa; hemp; and wheat with a higher fiber content. It has a commercialization agreement with S&W Seed Company for the exclusive license of an improved quality alfalfa seed in the United States and internationally. The company was formerly known as Cellectis Plant Sciences, Inc. and changed its name to Calyxt, Inc. in May 2015. Calyxt, Inc. was incorporated in 2010 and is headquartered in Roseville, Minnesota. Calyxt, Inc. is a subsidiary of Cellectis S.A.

Awarener score: 3.0

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