Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Calyxt, Inc. (CLXT)

Awarener score: 3.2

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 (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: 1.3

  • CLXT profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very poor. They stand somewhat worse than 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: 4.3

  • 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 very good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands in a weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.0

  • Calyxt, Inc. usually gets pauper returns on the resources it controls. It proves last-in-rank when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets extremely poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a disappointment 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 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 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 encouraging in relation to 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 very 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: 6.3

  • 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 triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be close to average when 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.
  • Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's in good shape compared 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 during the first couple of weeks from the purchase. It ranks weak 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 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.
  • Revenues are huge in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. Low property, plant, and equipment requirements, allows the company to keep more money to reward stockholders in the long run. It looks a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is huge considering yearly sales, which is great. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 2.5

  • 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 excellent 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 bottom tier 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 last-in-rank when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has significantly 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 numerous more stockholders. It came up in a weak position compared to peer ventures.
  • The company has neither net debt nor net cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks worse 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.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a not far from one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks a slight improvement compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is extremely high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains better than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty 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: 0.01 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.01 billions

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: 3.2

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 (Poor).