Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM)

Awarener score: 7.1

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 (Very good), the business stability (Average) and growth (Modest), 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: 5.5

  • Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Columbia Sportswear Company business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly better than rivals.

Margins score: 7.5

  • COLM 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 very good. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually good. They remain impressive in relation to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be good in relation to total revenues. They're still well ranked against similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually very good considering total sales, and remain more than average in relation to rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands great when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 7.0

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

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

  • COLM had to pay a lot of income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse than 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: 8.8

  • Columbia Sportswear Company usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually abundant profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got excellent 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.6

  • COLM 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 encouraging 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 substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
  • Has increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved excellent in relation to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and should be reasonable safe. Sustainability looks well ranked against comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a slight improvement 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 slight improvement compared to rivals.
  • The company uses a large portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn sour. It still looks weak when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.3

  • Columbia Sportswear Company intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • The company has roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be in good shape compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains somewhat better than rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. It looks encouraging in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's a slight improvement compared 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 slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be mediocre against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers longer than two months after the purchase. It ranks below average when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers six months or more before charging its customers, so there's abundant money invested in working capital. It's in a weak position compared to similar companies.
  • Company earns net interest income on its investments and therefore is in a quite comfortable financial position. It stands top-notch against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been excellent when measured against loans taken. It could take less than two years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are reasonable 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 excellent when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.4

  • Columbia Sportswear Company 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 lacking 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 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, at the current price the share might be interesting. It's still similar to 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 has barely more debt than cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks well ranked against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be more or less reasonable, but hardly cheap. It ranks weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a roughly two to one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a very weak position compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is significantly high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly worse than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. 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 good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.3


COLM logos

Company at a glance: Columbia Sportswear Company (COLM)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Apparel Manufacturing

Market Cap: 5.58 billions

Revenues TTM: 3.42 billions

Columbia Sportswear Company, together with its subsidiaries, designs, sources, markets, and distributes outdoor, active, and everyday lifestyle apparel, footwear, accessories, and equipment in the United States, Latin America, the Asia Pacific, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Canada. The company provides apparel, accessories, and equipment that are used in various activities, such as skiing, snowboarding, hiking, climbing, mountaineering, camping, hunting, fishing, trail running, water sports, yoga, golf, and adventure travel. It also offers footwear products that include lightweight hiking boots, trail running shoes, rugged cold weather boots for activities on snow and ice, sandals and shoes for use in water activities, and function-first fashion footwear and casual shoes for everyday use. The company sells its products under the Columbia, Mountain Hardwear, SOREL, and prAna brand names through the company owned network of branded and outlet retail stores, brand-specific e-commerce sites, and concession-based arrangements with third-parties at branded outlet and shop-in-shop retail locations, as well as through independently operated specialty outdoor and sporting goods stores, sporting goods chains, department store chains, Internet retailers, and international distributors. As of December 31, 2021, it operated approximately 455 retail stores. The company was founded in 1938 and is headquartered in Portland, Oregon.

Awarener score: 7.1

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