Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO)

Awarener score: 5.1

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

  • Business has been shrinking. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Columbus McKinnon Corporation business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 6.2

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

Growth score: 7.7

  • Columbus McKinnon Corporation profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been lacking compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a low step, which has been somewhat worse than comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a good pace, which compares almost average when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at an excellent tempo. It turns to be close to average when compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an extremely fast speed. It was well ranked against rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been extremely high, and more than average in relation to peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at an extremely fast rhythm in past years. It's been a slight improvement compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 6.3

  • CMCO had to pay a lot of income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse than peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a very little portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
  • The company shows business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 6.8

  • Columbus McKinnon Corporation usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain close to average when compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks almost average when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got very good 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.9

  • CMCO usually uses almost no genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is non-significant. It stands great when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is last-in-rank when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came mediocre against competitors.
  • Has somewhat increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a slight portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks better than most 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 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 rather normal in relation to rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.2

  • Columbus McKinnon Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very large portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be last-in-rank 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.
  • A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's close to average when compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a 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 close to average when 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 after a month and a half from the purchase. It ranks almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers four months or more before charging its customers, so there's significant money invested in working capital. It's rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a significant portion of usual business earnings, but are mostly bearable. It stands slightly worse than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been low when measured against loans taken. Even cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than seven years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks below average when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are very good 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is reasonable when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.3

  • Columbus McKinnon Corporation looks very expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be weak 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated some good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat better than similar companies.
  • The company usually generates reasonably more than enough 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, the current valuation might be fair. It's still encouraging in relation to 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 very weak position compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks bottom tier against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is somewhat high. Improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which presents some risks. It ranks below average 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 lacking compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be more than reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains well ranked against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned little 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 a modest earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.8


CMCO logos

Company at a glance: Columbus McKinnon Corporation (CMCO)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Farm & Heavy Construction Machinery

Market Cap: 0.76 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.91 billions

Columbus McKinnon Corporation designs, manufactures, and markets intelligent motion solutions to ergonomically move, lift, position, and secure materials worldwide. The company offers electric, air-powered, lever, and hand hoists; hoist trolleys, explosion-protected and custom engineered hoists, and winches; crane systems, such as crane components and kits, enclosed track rail systems, mobile and jib cranes, and fall protection systems, as well as material handling solutions; rigging equipment comprising below-the-hook lifting devices, shackles, chains and chains accessories, forestry and hand tools, lifting slings, lashing systems, and tie-downs and load binders; rotary unions and swivel joints; and mechanical and electromechanical actuators. It also provides power and motion technology products, including AC motor controls and line regenerative systems, automation and diagnostics, brakes, cable and festoon systems, collision avoidance systems, conductor bar systems, DC motor and magnet control systems, elevator drives, inverter duty motors, mining drives, pendant pushbutton stations, radio controls, and wind inverters; power delivery subsystems; overhead aluminum light rail workstations; and low profile, flexible chain, large scale, sanitary, and vertical elevation conveyor systems, as well as pallet system conveyors and accumulation systems. The company serves market verticals, including general industries, transportation, energy and utilities, process industries, industrial automation, construction and infrastructure, food and beverage, entertainment, life sciences, consumer packaged goods, and e-commerce/supply chain/warehousing. It offers its products to end users directly, as well as through distributors, independent crane builders, material handling specialists and integrators, government agencies, original equipment manufacturers, and engineering procurement and construction firms. The company was founded in 1875 and is headquartered in Buffalo, New York.

Awarener score: 5.1

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