Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Campbell Soup Company (CPB)

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 (Good), the business stability (Very good) 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: 6.5

  • Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been more than average in relation to peer companies.
  • Campbell Soup Company business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks mediocre against rivals.

Margins score: 7.3

  • CPB profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually sufficient. They stand well ranked against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be excellent. It's top tier when measured against 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 very good in relation to total revenues. They're still top-notch against similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually good considering total sales, and remain great when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands top tier when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 6.3

  • Campbell Soup Company profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been close to average when compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been shrinking, which has been worse than most 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 low speed. It was slightly better than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been extremely high, and great when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at an extremely fast rhythm in past years. It's been excellent in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 7.7

  • CPB had to pay substantial income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better than peers.
  • Research and development expenses hardly consume a portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
  • The company shows very good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a slight improvement compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 9.2

  • Campbell Soup Company usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks top tier when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got huge 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: 5.0

  • CPB usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is large. It stands more than average in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing most of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, and saving a little funds for something else, which is weak when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid very good dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat better than competitors.
  • Dividend payments have been more or less stable in recent years. The company has behaved in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • The company pays more dividends than genuine funds is usually able to generate, therefore borrowing more funds. Future payments may be at risk, especially if a downturn in business occurs. Sustainability looks worse than most comparable companies.
  • The company usually neither enlarges nor reduces the pool of investors, resulting in approximately the same 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 somewhat more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so some part of them is paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business somewhat improves, or rewards will probably not be sustained at this pace. It still looks substantially worse when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.1

  • Campbell Soup Company intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a huge portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might be liquidity concerns. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • A significant part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have almost as many claims on the company as shareholders. It remains slightly worse than rival firms.
  • Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks more than average in relation to peers.
  • Normally has approximately three months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks last-in-rank 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 close to average when compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a portion of usual business earnings, but are bearable. It stands somewhat better than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than three years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.
  • Fixed assets turnover remains undisclosed. It looks we cannot relate it to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is quite good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.1

  • Campbell Soup Company looks expensive 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 neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could get, it reinvested in the business, which stands mediocre against similar companies.
  • The company usually generates somewhat 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 reasonable. It's still below average when measured against 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 is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is somewhat high. Improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which presents some risks. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 lacking compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains worse than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned little 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 very good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.4


CPB logos

Company at a glance: Campbell Soup Company (CPB)

Sector, industry: Consumer Defensive, Packaged Foods

Market Cap: 14.25 billions

Revenues TTM: 8.56 billions

Campbell Soup Company, together with its subsidiaries, manufactures and markets food and beverage products in the United States and internationally. The company operates through Meals & Beverages and Snacks segments. The Meals & Beverages segment engages in the retail and foodservice businesses in the United States and Canada. This segment provides Campbell's condensed and ready-to-serve soups; Swanson broth and stocks; Pacific Foods broth, soups, and non-dairy beverages; Prego pasta sauces; Pace Mexican sauces; Campbell's gravies, pasta, beans, and dinner sauces; Swanson canned poultry; V8 juices and beverages; Campbell's tomato juice; and snacking products in foodservice in Canada. The Snacks segment retails Pepperidge Farm cookies, crackers, fresh bakery, and frozen products; Milano cookies and Goldfish crackers; and Snyder's of Hanover pretzels, Lance sandwich crackers, Cape Cod and Kettle Brand potato chips, Late July snacks, Snack Factory pretzel crisps, Pop Secret popcorn, Emerald nuts, and other snacking products. This segment is also involved in the retail business in Latin America. It sells its products through retail food chains, mass discounters and merchandisers, club stores, convenience stores, drug stores, and dollar stores, as well as e-commerce and other retail, commercial, and non-commercial establishments, and independent contractor distributors. The company was founded in 1869 and is headquartered in Camden, New Jersey.

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