Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Mr. Cooper Group Inc. (COOP)

Awarener score: 9.1

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 (Superb), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).

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 growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • Mr. Cooper Group Inc. business varies wildly, ups and downs could be very frequent. It's very risky. It looks bottom tier against rivals.

Margins score: 8.8

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

Growth score: 4.9

  • Mr. Cooper Group Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been a slight improvement compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at an extremely fast step, 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 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: 7.0

  • COOP had hardly to pay income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly 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: 8.5

  • Mr. Cooper Group Inc. usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain lacking compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually excellent profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks almost average when measured 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 similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.0

  • COOP usually uses a sparse portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is modest. It stands similar to rival firms.
  • The company is usually heavily investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months the stock paid no dividends. It came bottom tier against competitors.
  • Has stopped or virtually stopped paying dividends. Unless they were a special one-shot payment, the company could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved a disappointment 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 has greatly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in a very weak position 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 close to average when compared to rivals.
  • The company uses a slight portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors. The company is usually improving its financial position, and could most likely increase stockholder rewards if it wished to do so. It still looks below average when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.6

  • Mr. Cooper Group Inc. has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Current ratio remains a mystery, as there was not sufficient Balance Sheet information. It turns to be unidentifiable against similar firms.
  • All resources are company owned, with virtually no financial debt. Financial position is outstanding. The company could significantly borrow money if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains slightly worse than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks similar to rivals.
  • Quick ratio is unavailable at this moment, due to lacking data. It's a pity we cannot compare it with peer firms.
  • A conclusion on cash ratio could not be reached, as we lack inputs, which is unfortunate when trying to measure against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks below 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 somewhat worse than peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks great when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly three months before charging its customers, so there's sufficient money invested in working capital. It's excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands slightly worse than rival firms.
  • There is insufficient data to conclude on the relationship of EBITDA and debt for this company. It ranks unknown against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are huge in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. Low property, plant, and equipment requirements, allows the company to keep more money to reward stockholders in the long run. It looks in good shape compared 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 slightly worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 8.7

  • Mr. Cooper Group Inc. looks extremely cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation to 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 consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
  • The company usually generates plenty 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 looks to be very attractive. It's still encouraging in relation to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has significantly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up a slight improvement compared to peer ventures.
  • The company has substantial more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks extremely cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be very hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, a weak financial position, or that earnings aren't representative. If that isn't the case, the stock price could be extremely attractive. It ranks top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a not far from one-to-one relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks close to average when compared to rival firms.
  • The stock price is at or below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is really low, the stock may be selling a t a discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains slightly better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge 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 an extreme earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be significantly undervalued. It's still close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.8


COOP logos

Company at a glance: Mr. Cooper Group Inc. (COOP)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Mortgage Finance

Market Cap: 2.92 billions

Revenues TTM: 3.31 billions

Mr. Cooper Group Inc. provides servicing, origination, and transaction-based services related to single-family residences in the United States. The company operates through two segments: Servicing and Originations. The Servicing segment performs activities for underlying mortgages, including collecting and disbursing borrower payments, investor reporting, customer service, and modifying loans. The Originations segment originates residential mortgage loans through its direct-to-consumer channel, as well as originates and purchases loans from mortgage bankers and brokers. It operates primarily under the Mr. Cooper and Xome brands. The company was formerly known as WMIH Corp. and changed its name to Mr. Cooper Group Inc. in October 2018. Mr. Cooper Group Inc. was incorporated in 2015 and is based in Coppell, Texas.

Awarener score: 9.1

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 (Superb), the business stability (Bottom) and growth (Superb), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Superb).