Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cumulus Media Inc. (CMLS)

Awarener score: 6.2

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

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: 4.0

  • Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Cumulus Media Inc. business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 5.0

  • CMLS profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very good. They stand somewhat better than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be hardly sufficient. It's weak when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually hardly sufficient. They remain in a weak position compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be meagre in relation to total revenues. They're still mediocre against similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually meagre considering total sales, and remain weak when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be meagre when confronted to sales. Company stands weak when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.1

  • Cumulus Media Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very 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: 1.0

  • CMLS had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier 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: 4.8

  • Cumulus Media Inc. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak 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 barely sufficient 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.5

  • CMLS usually uses almost no genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is non-significant. It stands weak when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing part of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping some funds for something else. It can't keep forever, which is weak 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 reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive 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 good shape compared to rivals.
  • The company uses a moderate portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn very sour. It still looks encouraging in relation to competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.5

  • Cumulus Media Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent some portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be substantially worse 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 a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • A significant part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have almost as many claims on the company as shareholders. It remains mediocre against rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks below average when measured against 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 almost another of cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks almost average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly worse than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks great when measured against industry peers.
  • The company charges its customers 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.
  • Usual business earnings barely cover net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but hardly shareholders. Situation is risky, profitability must increase, or additional stockholders' funding will eventually be required. It stands worse than most rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been very low when measured against loans taken. Even significantly cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than ten years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks substantially worse 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 close to average when compared 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 top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.8

  • Cumulus Media Inc. looks somewhat expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be almost 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly worse than similar companies.
  • In the past years the company barely generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still weak when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up in good shape 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 mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks very cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be very attractive. It ranks more than average in relation to 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 in good shape compared 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 somewhat better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned great money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a very good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still lacking compared to peer companies.

Total score: 4.5


CMLS logos

Company at a glance: Cumulus Media Inc. (CMLS)

Sector, industry: Communication Services, Broadcasting

Market Cap: 0.13 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.95 billions

Cumulus Media Inc., an audio-first media company, owns and operates radio stations in the United States. It owns and operates 406 stations in 86 markets, as well as approximately 9,500 affiliated stations through Westwood One. The company's content portfolio includes sports, news, talk, and entertainment programming from various brands, including the NFL, the NCAA, the Masters, CNN, the AP, the Academy of Country Music Awards, and other partners. It also provides digital marketing services, such as email marketing, geo-targeted display and video solutions, website and microsite building, hosting, social media management, reputation management, and search engine marketing and optimization. The company serves advertisers through broadcast and on-demand digital, mobile, social, and voice-activated platforms. Cumulus Media Inc. was incorporated in 2002 and is based in Atlanta, Georgia.

Awarener score: 6.2

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