• Twitter
• Facebook
• Snapchat
• Pinterest
• LinkedIn
• Tumblr

---

Fundamental analysis: CRA International, Inc. (CRAI)

Awarener score: 7.3

Conclusion

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: 7.5

• Business growth has been almost stagnant. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
• CRA International, Inc. business trend is extremely stable, which is best. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 6.5

• CRAI profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually hardly sufficient. They stand bottom tier against rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be good. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually good. They remain close to average when compared to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be sufficient in relation to total revenues. They're still slightly worse than similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually good considering total sales, and remain almost average when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands almost average when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 6.4

• CRA International, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a good pace. It's been in good shape compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a low 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 a normal tempo. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a normal speed. It was well ranked against rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been average, and more than average in relation to peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a normal rhythm in past years. It's been in good shape compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 4.0

• CRAI had to pay substantial income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse 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: 8.0

• CRA International, Inc. usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a weak position compared to similar companies.
• There's usually excellent profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks similar to 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.1

• CRAI 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 weak when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is weak when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat better than competitors.
• Has increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved close to average when compared to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a modest portion of genuine funds generation and should be reasonable safe. Sustainability looks somewhat better than comparable companies.
• The company usually reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a slight improvement compared 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 good shape compared to rivals.
• The company uses a large portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn sour. It still looks below average when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.9

• CRA International, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be similar to peer companies.
• The company has somewhat lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some liquidity concerns. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
• Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks similar to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and short-term receivables. It's a disappointment compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has very few cents of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
• Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
• On average, it takes higher than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat worse than peers.
• On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks similar to industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers roughly two months before charging its customers, so there's some money invested in working capital. It's lacking compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a non-significant portion of usual business earnings, and are therefore extremely easily to bear. It stands somewhat better than 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are reasonable 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 very weak position compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is very good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.0

• CRA International, Inc. looks somewhat expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be more than average 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 some slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands slightly worse than similar companies.
• The company usually generates 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, at the current price the share might be interesting. It's still similar to industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly 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 indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks bottom tier against similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be more or less reasonable, but hardly cheap. It ranks more than average 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 in good shape compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is significantly high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains slightly worse than 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 almost average when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a 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: 6.2

---

Awarener score: 7.3

Conclusion

Support us!

We are an independent project. No ads, no suscription, no registration required.

• Donate!