Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: CenterPoint Energy, Inc. (CNP)

Awarener score: 4.5

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 (Bottom), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Modest).

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: 3.5

  • Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • CenterPoint Energy, Inc. business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 7.3

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

Growth score: 2.7

  • CenterPoint Energy, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in good shape compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very low step, which has been slightly better than comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an excellent pace, which compares great 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: 10.0

  • CNP managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been top-notch 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: 7.0

  • CenterPoint Energy, Inc. usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks more than average in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.6

  • CNP usually uses a slight portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is light. It stands weak when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is below average when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid very good dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly better than competitors.
  • Has increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved excellent in relation to similar firms.
  • The company generates very few genuine funds. Dividend payments are usually on borrowed money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, future payments could be at risk. Sustainability looks bottom tier against comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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 a disappointment 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: 5.2

  • CenterPoint Energy, 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 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 slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a third of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have claims on the company. It remains slightly better than 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 rather normal in relation to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month and a half credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month 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 slightly worse than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately three months after the purchase. It ranks similar to 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 lacking compared to similar companies.
  • Usual business earnings are mostly consumed by net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but stockholders not so much. Profitability must increase, lest the firm risks only working for creditors' benefit. It stands worse than most 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.
  • Last twelve months revenues were non-significant in relation to fixed assets. The company must improve income to take advantage of used resources. It looks excellent in relation to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still well ranked against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.3

  • CenterPoint Energy, Inc. looks somewhat expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be great 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 in a weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands slightly worse than similar companies.
  • The company usually consumes 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 business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still substantially worse when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. It came up a disappointment compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks slightly worse than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks great when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a three or four to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks rather normal in relation 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 better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned good money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be great 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: 5.8


CNP logos

Company at a glance: CenterPoint Energy, Inc. (CNP)

Sector, industry: Utilities, Utilities—Regulated Electric

Market Cap: 18.14 billions

Revenues TTM: 6.83 billions

CenterPoint Energy, Inc. operates as a public utility holding company in the United States. The company operates through Electric and Natural Gas segments. The Electric segment includes electric transmission and distribution services to electric customers and electric generation assets, as well as assets in the wholesale power market. The Natural Gas segment provides natural gas distribution services, as well as home appliance maintenance and repair services to customers in Minnesota; and home repair protection plans to natural gas customers in Arkansas, Indiana, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas and Louisiana through a third party. This segment also engages in the sale of regulated intrastate natural gas, and transportation and storage of natural gas for residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation customers. As of December 31, 2021, it served approximately 2.7 million metered customers; owned 239 substation sites with a total installed rated transformer capacity of 71,241 megavolt amperes; operated approximately 1,00,000 linear miles of natural gas distribution and transmission mains; and owned and operated 285 miles of intrastate pipeline in Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma. The company was founded in 1866 and is headquartered in Houston, Texas.

Awarener score: 4.5

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 (Bottom), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Modest).