Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cimpress plc (CMPR)

Awarener score: 6.9

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

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 shrinking. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Cimpress plc business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 5.8

  • CMPR profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very good. They stand slightly better than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be sufficient. 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 hardly sufficient in relation to total revenues. They're still somewhat better than similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually hardly sufficient considering total sales, and remain encouraging in relation to rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be hardly sufficient when confronted to sales. Company stands encouraging in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 2.3

  • Cimpress plc profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been shrinking, which has been worse than most comparable firms.
  • Profits growth -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been almost stagnant, which compares below average when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a slow tempo. It turns to be close to average when 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

  • CMPR had to pay too much income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse than peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a low portion of revenues. It's below average when measured against competitors.
  • The company grows very little in relation to research and development efforts. It stands in a weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 8.0

  • Cimpress plc usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to 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 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.6

  • CMPR usually uses a significant portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is abundant. It stands more than average in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is similar 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 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.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.8

  • Cimpress plc 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 somewhat lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some 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.
  • Most controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks weak when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks top tier when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be better than most peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks almost average 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 in good shape compared 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 mediocre against 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are quite good 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 in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is excellent when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still well ranked against peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.6

  • Cimpress plc 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 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 slightly better than similar companies.
  • The company usually generates much more 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, at the current price the share might be very interesting. It's still similar to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company hasn't rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up a slight improvement 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 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 very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks a slight improvement compared to rival firms.
  • There's no accounting equity, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains bottom tier against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a little money. It happens to be almost average when measured against 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 a slight improvement compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.3


CMPR logos

Company at a glance: Cimpress plc (CMPR)

Sector, industry: Communication Services, Advertising Agencies

Market Cap: 0.71 billions

Revenues TTM: 2.89 billions

Cimpress plc provides various mass customization of printing and related products in North America, Europe, and internationally. The company operates through five segments: Vistaprint, PrintBrothers, The Print Group, National Pen, and All Other Businesses. It offers printed and digital marketing products; internet-based canvas-print wall décor, business signage, and other printed products; business cards; and marketing materials, such as flyers and postcards, digital and marketing services, writing instruments, decorated apparel, promotional products and gifts, packaging, design services, textiles, and magazines and catalogs. The company also manufactures and markets custom writing instruments and promotional products, apparels, and gifts; and provides professional desktop publishing skill sets for local printers, print resellers, graphic artists, advertising agencies, and other customers. In addition, it offers graphic design services, do-it-yourself (DIY) design services, website services, and corporate solutions under the VistaPrint, VistaCreate, 99designs by Vista, Vista Corporate Solutions, and Vista x Wix brand names; and online printing solutions. Further, the company provides promotional and packaging products, logo apparel, books and magazines, wall decors, photo merchandise, invitations and announcements, and other categories; and website design and hosting, and email marketing services, as well as order referral and other third-party offerings. The company serves various businesses, graphic designers, resellers, and printers, as well as teams, associations, groups, consumers, and families. Cimpress plc was founded in 1994 and is based in Dundalk, Ireland.

Awarener score: 6.9

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