• Twitter
• Facebook
• Snapchat
• Pinterest
• LinkedIn
• Tumblr

---

Fundamental analysis: Century Casinos, Inc. (CNTY)

Awarener score: 6.8

Conclusion

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: 7.5

• Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
• Century Casinos, Inc. business trend stability is good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks top-notch against rivals.

Margins score: 6.2

• CNTY 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 good. It's below average when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually good. They remain close to average when 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 worse than similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually hardly sufficient considering total sales, and remain below average 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: 3.3

• Century Casinos, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very good pace. It's been rather normal in relation to competitors.
• In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an extremely fast pace, which compares similar to 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

• CNTY 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: 5.8

• Century Casinos, Inc. usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually lacking. It ranks below average when measured against 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 7.2

• CNTY usually uses a very large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is heavy. It stands below average when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat better than competitors.
• Has recently started or restarted paying dividends to stockholders. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved impressive in relation to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a non-significant portion of genuine funds generation and are likely very safe. Sustainability looks somewhat better than comparable companies.
• The company somewhat enlarges a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains rather normal 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 close to average when compared to rivals.
• The company uses a non-significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors. The company is usually improving its financial position, and could greatly boost stockholder rewards if it wished so. It still looks top tier when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.9

• Century Casinos, 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 similar to peer companies.
• The company has more than enough short-term resources to face short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are non-significant. It turns to be excellent in relation 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 worse than most 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 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 a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks more than average in relation to peers.
• Normally has approximately only a couple of weekly sales worth in inventory. It comes up as excellent 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 before a month since the purchase. It ranks more than average in relation 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 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 somewhat worse than rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been extremely low when measured against loans taken. Even severely cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than twenty years to repay the obligations. Additional stockholders' funding may be a quicker way, but at the cost of increasing the mouths to feed on the eventual pie of profits. It ranks similar to 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 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 slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.6

• Century Casinos, Inc. profits are really small compared to market valuation, market valuation doesn't rely on current earnings. It happens to be substantially worse 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most 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 more than average in relation 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 is high. Substantial improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is somewhat risky. It ranks substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks excellent 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 well ranked against 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 encouraging in relation to 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: 5.3

---

Awarener score: 6.8

Conclusion

Support us!

We are an independent project. No ads, no suscription, no registration required.

• Donate!