Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: CorVel Corporation (CRVL)

Awarener score: 5.4

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 (Average), the business stability (Very good) and growth (Very poor), 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: 5.0

  • Business has been shrinking at a fast pace. It's been last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • CorVel Corporation business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 6.7

  • CRVL profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually meagre. They stand worse than most rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be very 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 good in relation to total revenues. They're still somewhat worse than similar companies.
  • Profits -before income taxes- are usually good considering total sales, and remain below average when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be good when confronted to sales. Company stands below average when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 3.9

  • CorVel Corporation 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 growing at a very low step, which has been mediocre against comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a 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 somewhat worse than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been almost null, and below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a very low rhythm in past years. It's been lacking compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 5.0

  • CRVL had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly 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: 9.8

  • CorVel Corporation usually gets huge returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets huge proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain excellent in relation to similar companies.
  • Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually paramount. It ranks more than average in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got excellent 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 similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.2

  • CRVL usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is large. It stands similar to rival firms.
  • The company is usually somewhat investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation to 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 reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains rather normal 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 slight improvement compared to rivals.
  • The company uses somewhat more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so some part of them is paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business somewhat improves, or rewards will probably not be sustained at this pace. It still looks substantially worse when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.7

  • CorVel Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be similar to peer companies.
  • The company has somewhat more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns might not be that important. It turns to be a slight improvement 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 well ranked against rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources can be made into cash reasonably quick, which is good for liquidity and risk. It looks great when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's close to average when compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly half of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on slightly higher than two months credit. It still ranks similar 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.
  • Pays suppliers mostly in cash. It ranks substantially worse when measured against 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 close to average when compared 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 excellent when measured against loans taken. It could take less than two years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks more than average in relation 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 a disappointment compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is excellent 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: 4.3

  • CorVel Corporation looks heavily expensive in relation to profits and financial position. 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 slightly better 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 barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. 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 well ranked against 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 in a very weak position compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is extremely high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains worse than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost a little money. It happens to be weak when measured against 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 in a weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.7


CRVL logos

Company at a glance: CorVel Corporation (CRVL)

Sector, industry: Financial Services, Insurance Brokers

Market Cap: 2.98 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.51 billions

CorVel Corporation provides workers' compensation, auto, liability, and health solutions for employers, third party administrators, insurance companies, and government agencies to assist them in managing the medical costs and monitoring the quality of care associated with healthcare claims. It applies technology, including artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing to enhance the managing of episodes of care and the related health care costs. The company offers network solutions services, including automated medical fee auditing, preferred provider management and reimbursement services, retrospective utilization review, facility claim review, professional review, pharmacy services, directed care services, Medicare solutions, clearinghouse services, independent medical examinations, and inpatient medical bill review. It also provides a range of patient management services, such as claims management, case management, 24/7 nurse triage, utilization management, vocational rehabilitation, and life care planning, as well as processing of claims for self-insured payors with respect to property and casualty insurance. The company was incorporated in 1987 and is headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas.

Awarener score: 5.4

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