Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Canterbury Park Holding Corporation (CPHC)

Awarener score: 5.2

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 (Poor) and growth (Bottom), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Modest).

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: 2.0

  • Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Canterbury Park Holding Corporation business varies, ups and downs are rather normal. Risk is sufficient. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 8.2

  • CPHC profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually very good. They stand slightly worse than 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 very good. They remain rather normal 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 well ranked against similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually very good considering total sales, and remain great when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be very good when confronted to sales. Company stands more than average in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 8.9

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

Miscellaneous score: 6.0

  • CPHC had to pay sparse 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: 8.2

  • Canterbury Park Holding Corporation 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 quite good. It ranks great when measured against 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: 6.1

  • CPHC 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 encouraging in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely 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 it paid low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came worse than most competitors.
  • Has greatly increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects are most likely good. The company has behaved lacking compared to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and should be reasonable safe. Sustainability looks worse than most 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 rather normal in relation to rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 7.9

  • Canterbury Park Holding Corporation has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Almost no resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is great. Company could significantly increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains top-notch against 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 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 slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on less than a month credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes close to one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be mediocre against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks top tier when measured against industry peers.
  • The company charges its customers long before it must pay its suppliers, so the more it sales, the more free funds it gets. It's excellent in relation 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 great when measured against loans taken. Debt might be repaid almost as soon as desired. It ranks top tier when measured against 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 a disappointment compared 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 worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.1

  • Canterbury Park Holding Corporation looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be encouraging 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 slight improvement compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands top-notch against 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 has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little more stockholders. 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 slightly better than 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 encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks in a weak position compared 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 slightly better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned great 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 a very good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.8


CPHC logos

Company at a glance: Canterbury Park Holding Corporation (CPHC)

Sector, industry: Consumer Cyclical, Gambling

Market Cap: 0.13 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.03 billions

Canterbury Park Holding Corporation, through its subsidiaries, engages in horse racing, card casino, food and beverage, and real estate development businesses. The company's Horse Racing segment operates year-round simulcasting of horse races, as well as wagering on live thoroughbred and quarter horse races on a seasonal basis. Its Card Casino segment offers unbanked card games, such as poker and table games. The company's Food and Beverage segment operates concession stands, restaurants and buffets, bars, and other food venues, as well as café style restaurants and full-service bars within the Card Casino and simulcast area. This segment also provides lounge services along with a buffet restaurant; various concession style food and beverages during live racing; and catering and events services. Its Development segment engages in various development opportunities, such as residential development, office, restaurants, hotel, entertainment, and retail operations. The company is also involved in the provision of related services and activities, such as parking, advertising signage, publication sales, and other entertainment events and activities. Canterbury Park Holding Corporation was founded in 1994 and is based in Shakopee, Minnesota.

Awarener score: 5.2

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 (Poor) and growth (Bottom), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Modest).