Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Central Pacific Financial Corp. (CPF)

Awarener score: 6.3

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 (Superb) and growth (Lacking), 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: 7.0

  • Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Central Pacific Financial Corp. business trend is extremely stable, which is best. It looks top-notch against rivals.

Margins score: 7.2

  • CPF profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually extremely poor. They stand worse than most rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be hardly sufficient. It's weak when measured against 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 similar to rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be excellent when confronted to sales. Company stands almost average when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 4.8

  • Central Pacific Financial Corp. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
  • There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very low 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 low 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 on total net profit has been low, and similar to peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a normal rhythm in past years. It's been a slight improvement compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

  • CPF had to pay a lot of income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been mediocre 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: 6.5

  • Central Pacific Financial Corp. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets very good 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 more than average in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got barely sufficient 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 substantially worse when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.5

  • CPF on average doesn't generate genuine funds, so to buy or replace property, plants and equipment must either burn existing cash or increase debt. It stands substantially worse when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually somewhat 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 excellent dividends, considering the current stock price. It came top-notch against competitors.
  • Dividend payments have been more or less stable in recent years. The company has behaved lacking compared 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 reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent 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 in a weak position compared to rivals.
  • The company generates very few genuine funds. Investor rewards must be paid burning existing cash or by borrowing money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, stockholder compensation could be at risk. It still looks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.8

  • Central Pacific Financial Corp. has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Current ratio remains a mystery, as there was not sufficient Balance Sheet information. It turns to be unidentifiable against similar firms.
  • Very few resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is very solid. Company could increase debt 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 a month credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
  • Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
  • We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
  • Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
  • Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against 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 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.
  • Revenues are somewhat low 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 in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still slightly better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.1

  • Central Pacific Financial Corp. has an unknown adjusted Price-to-Earnings ratio, so we cannot comment on that. It happens to be a necessary comparison 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.
  • There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
  • Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure 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.
  • We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be attractive. 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 excellent in relation to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat worse than peer firms.
  • We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
  • An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 5.9


CPF logos

Company at a glance: Central Pacific Financial Corp. (CPF)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Banks—Regional

Market Cap: 0.57 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.26 billions

Central Pacific Financial Corp. operates as the holding company for Central Pacific Bank that provides commercial banking products and services to businesses, professionals, and individuals in the United States. It offers various deposit products and services, including personal and business checking and savings accounts, money market accounts, and time certificates of deposit. The company's lending activities comprise commercial loans, financial and agricultural loans, commercial and residential mortgages, and construction loans to small and medium-sized companies, business professionals, and real estate investors and developers, as well as home equity, and consumer loans to local homebuyers and individuals. It also provides debit cards, internet and mobile banking, cash management, full-service ATMs, digital banking services, traveler's checks, safe deposit boxes, international banking services, night depository facilities, foreign exchange and wire transfers, trust services, and retail brokerage services. In addition, the company offers wealth management products and services, including non-deposit investment products, annuities, insurance, investment management, asset custody, and general consultation and planning services. As of December 31, 2021, it operated 30 branches and 69 automated teller machines in the state of Hawaii. The company was incorporated in 1954 and is headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii.

Awarener score: 6.3

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 (Superb) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Excellent).