Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. (CQP)

Awarener score: 7.6

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 (Poor) and growth (Excellent), 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: 6.0

  • Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been great when measured against peer companies.
  • Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. business varies, ups and downs are rather normal. Risk is sufficient. It looks mediocre against rivals.

Margins score: 8.2

  • CQP profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually sufficient. They stand slightly better than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be huge. It's encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually very good. They remain a slight improvement compared to peers.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be excellent 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 more than average in relation to 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: 2.1

  • Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been in a weak position 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- tended to shrink, which compares substantially worse when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tended to shrink. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- tended to shrink. It was worse than most rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been negative, and substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have been shrinking in the past years. It's been in a very weak position compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 9.0

  • CQP managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. It's been better than most 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

  • Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation 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 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.0

  • CQP usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is rather normal. It stands more than average in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months it paid excellent 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 a slight improvement 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 mediocre against comparable companies.
  • The company somewhat enlarges a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a slight improvement compared to peer enterprises.
  • We are not sure on the effectiveness of the company when repurchasing shares, as there were not enough numbers to crunch. It stands unidentified against rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.7

  • Cheniere Energy 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 in a weak position 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.
  • Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has less than a dollar of cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks almost average when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately only a couple of weekly sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a slight improvement compared to competitors.
  • On average, it takes close to one month from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly worse than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers during the first couple of weeks from the purchase. It ranks weak when measured against industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers roughly one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's in a weak position compared 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 slightly better than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been very low when measured against loans taken. Even significantly cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than ten years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are 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 a slight improvement compared 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 well ranked against peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.8

  • Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. profits are really small compared to market valuation, market valuation doesn't rely on current earnings. 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 generated some good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly worse than 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 significantly 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 largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is very high. A lot of improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is risky. It ranks substantially worse when measured against 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 rather normal in relation to rival firms.
  • There's no accounting equity, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains bottom tier against 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 below average when measured against 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 a slight improvement compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.2


CQP logos

Company at a glance: Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. (CQP)

Sector, industry: Energy, Oil & Gas Midstream

Market Cap: 26.65 billions

Revenues TTM: 15.74 billions

Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P., through its subsidiaries, owns and operates natural gas liquefaction and export facility at the Sabine Pass liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal located in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The company's regasification facilities include five LNG storage tanks with an aggregate capacity of approximately 17 billion cubic feet equivalent; two marine berths that accommodate vessels with capacity of up to 266,000 cubic meters; and vaporizers with regasification capacity of approximately 4 billion cubic feet per day. It also owns a 94-mile pipeline that interconnects the Sabine Pass LNG terminal with various interstate pipelines. Cheniere Energy Partners GP, LLC serves as the general partner of the company. The company was founded in 2003 and is headquartered in Houston, Texas.

Awarener score: 7.6

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