Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Capital Product Partners L.P. (CPLP)

Awarener score: 5.0

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 (Modest), the business stability (Poor) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Good).

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: 3.5

  • Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Capital Product Partners L.P. business varies, ups and downs are rather normal. Risk is sufficient. It looks mediocre against rivals.

Margins score: 8.2

  • CPLP profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually sufficient. They stand somewhat better than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be huge. It's great when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually excellent. They remain excellent 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 better than most similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually excellent considering total sales, and remain great when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands encouraging in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 4.0

  • Capital Product Partners L.P. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been in a weak position compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very good step, which has been somewhat worse than comparable firms.
  • In past years, the company couldn't always turn a profit -available to repay debt and purchase properties-, 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, profits -before income taxes- grew at an extremely fast speed. It was somewhat better than 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: 9.0

  • CPLP managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. It's been slightly better 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: 5.0

  • Capital Product Partners L.P. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain close to average when compared to similar companies.
  • Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown against 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.8

  • CPLP usually uses almost all genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is huge. It stands almost average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is similar to industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid good dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly better than competitors.
  • In recent years, has greatly cut back dividend payments. It could be enduring difficult times. The company has behaved a disappointment 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 barely enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in slightly more 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 a disappointment 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: 4.5

  • Capital Product Partners L.P. has not disclosed intangibles assets, so we could not reach a meaningful conclusion on this metric. It happens to be a not known variable when measured with 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.
  • Most resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have more claims on the company than shareholders. Unless the company is a financial institution that takes deposits, the situation might be very risky. It remains worse than most rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. 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 few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are mostly on cash. It still ranks more than average in relation to 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 well ranked against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers almost when charging its customers, so there's very little money invested in working capital. It's excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • Usual business earnings are mostly consumed by net interest expenses. Creditors may be earning money by assuming risks, but stockholders not so much. Profitability must increase, lest the firm risks only working for creditors' benefit. It stands mediocre against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been extremely low when measured against loans taken. Even severely cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than twenty years to repay the obligations. Additional stockholders' funding may be a quicker way, but at the cost of increasing the mouths to feed on the eventual pie of profits. It ranks weak when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • The company didn't have revenues in the past twelve months. It must start having income to take advantage of used resources. It looks a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.5

  • Capital Product Partners L.P. looks reasonable in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be weak 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands worse than most similar companies.
  • In the past years the company hardly generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve enough to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still below average when measured against industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up a slight improvement compared to peer ventures.
  • The company is drowned in loans. It almost belongs more to the creditors than the stockholders. The situation may be dire. It looks bottom tier 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 encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a more than 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.
  • We have not enough information on the relation between current stock price and accounting book value. The company remains a mystery against 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 almost average when measured against industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a modest earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.4


CPLP logos

Company at a glance: Capital Product Partners L.P. (CPLP)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Marine Shipping

Market Cap: 0.28 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.22 billions

Capital Product Partners L.P., a shipping company, provides marine transportation services in Greece. Its vessels transport a range of cargoes, including liquefied natural gas, containerized goods, and dry bulk cargo under short-term voyage charters, and medium to long-term time charters. As of April 27, 2022, the company owned 21 vessels, including 11 Neo-Panamax container vessels, three Panamax container vessels, one cape-size bulk carrier, and six LNG carriers. Capital GP L.L.C. serves as the general partner of the company. The company was incorporated in 2007 and is headquartered in Piraeus, Greece.

Awarener score: 5.0

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 (Modest), the business stability (Poor) and growth (Lacking), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Good).