Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Salesforce, Inc. (CRM)

Awarener score: 6.1

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 (Average), the business stability (Superb) and growth (Very good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).

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: 9.0

  • Business has been growing at a very good pace. It's been encouraging in relation to peer companies.
  • Salesforce, Inc. business trend is extremely stable, which is best. It looks better than most rivals.

Margins score: 7.0

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

Growth score: 6.4

  • Salesforce, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a good pace. It's been a slight improvement compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very good step, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a good pace, which compares encouraging in relation to peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a very low tempo. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a very low speed. It was somewhat better than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been very good, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a good rhythm in past years. It's been lacking compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 7.7

  • CRM managed to get a credit on income taxes in the past years, even though it earned money. It's been better than most peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a moderate portion of revenues. It's encouraging in relation to competitors.
  • The company shows business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands rather normal in relation to rival companies.

Profitability score: 6.0

  • Salesforce, Inc. usually gets sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets hardly sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in good shape compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks more than average in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got 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: 4.0

  • CRM usually uses a slight portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is light. It stands more than average in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is weak when measured against industry peers.
  • In the past twelve months the stock paid no dividends. It came bottom tier against competitors.
  • The company pays no dividend, so measuring its growth is meaningless. The company has behaved in an conservative way compared to similar firms.
  • As no dividends are paid, it is useless trying to estimate their sustainability in time. Sustainability looks not applicable in regard to comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains close to average when 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: 5.8

  • Salesforce, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be significant difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be weak when measured against 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.
  • Roughly a tenth of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have minor claims on the company, and financial position is safe. It remains slightly worse than rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's in a weak position compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
  • Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes less than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers many months 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 impressive in relation to similar companies.
  • To what extent normalized EBITDA covers interest expenses is not known. It stands impossible to compare against rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks similar to 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 weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is slightly low when yearly sales are considered, business volume should be increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 4.1

  • Salesforce, Inc. profits are really small compared to market valuation, market valuation doesn't rely on current earnings. It happens to be substantially worse 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 in a very weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated some free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most 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 encouraging in relation to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. Future profits need to be high enough to justify the measure, as the pie of earnings will now be split among somewhat more stockholders. It came up close to average when compared to peer ventures.
  • The company has neither net debt nor net cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is huge, as profits were extremely low in relative terms. It ranks substantially worse when measured against 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 lacking compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains somewhat better than peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost some money. It happens to be encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a mediocre 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


CRM logos

Company at a glance: Salesforce, Inc. (CRM)

Sector, industry: Technology, Software—Application

Market Cap: 156.23 billions

Revenues TTM: 30.18 billions

Salesforce, Inc. provides customer relationship management technology that brings companies and customers together worldwide. Its Customer 360 platform empowers its customers to work together to deliver connected experiences for their customers. The company's service offerings include Sales to store data, monitor leads and progress, forecast opportunities, gain insights through analytics and relationship intelligence, and deliver quotes, contracts, and invoices; and Service that enables companies to deliver trusted and highly personalized customer service and support at scale. Its service offerings also comprise flexible platform that enables companies of various sizes, locations, and industries to build business apps to bring them closer to their customers with drag-and-drop tools; online learning platform that allows anyone to learn in-demand Salesforce skills; and Slack, a system of engagement. In addition, the company's service offerings include Marketing offering that enables companies to plan, personalize, and optimize one-to-one customer marketing journeys; and Commerce offering, which empowers brands to unify the customer experience across mobile, web, social, and store commerce points. Further, its service offerings comprise Tableau, an end-to-end analytics solution serving various enterprise use cases; and MuleSoft, an integration offering that allows its customers to unlock data across their enterprise. The company provides its service offering for customers in financial services, healthcare and life sciences, manufacturing, and other industries. It also offers professional services; and in-person and online courses to certify its customers and partners on architecting, administering, deploying, and developing its service offerings. The company provides its services through direct sales; and consulting firms, systems integrators, and other partners. Salesforce, Inc. was incorporated in 1999 and is headquartered in San Francisco, California.

Awarener score: 6.1

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 (Average), the business stability (Superb) and growth (Very good), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Lacking).