Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

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

Awarener score: 7.4

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 (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: 6.0

  • 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 somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 8.7

  • CQP profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually good. They stand slightly worse than rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be huge. It's similar to competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually excellent. They remain rather normal in relation 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 encouraging in relation to rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be excellent when confronted to sales. Company stands encouraging in relation to comparable firms.

Growth score: 4.6

  • Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very low step, which has been slightly worse than comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a very low pace, which compares below 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 lacking compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a very low speed. It was slightly better than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been very low, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have been almost stagnant in past years. It's been close to average when 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 great when measured against 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 great when measured against 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 great when measured against 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 slightly better than competitors.
  • Has somewhat increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. 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 usually enlarges quite a bit the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains lacking 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: 4.5

  • 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 a slight improvement 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 encouraging 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 in good shape compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and equivalents, which is well ranked against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a month credit. 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 approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be well ranked against peers.
  • On average pays suppliers during the first couple of weeks from the purchase. It ranks substantially worse 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 lacking compared to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a significant portion of usual business earnings, but are mostly bearable. 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.
  • 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 rather normal in relation 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: 5.1

  • Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. looks very expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be below average when measured against competitors.
  • We have not enough data to conclude on the relationship of price versus tangible book value for this company. It remains therefore unknown compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated some slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, 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 weak 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 largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks slightly 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 almost average 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.
  • 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 some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be similar 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 rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.5


CQP logos

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

Sector, industry: Energy, Oil & Gas Midstream

Market Cap: 25.05 billions

Revenues TTM: 13.09 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: 7.4

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 (Excellent).