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

---

Fundamental analysis: Carriage Services, Inc. (CSV)

Awarener score: 6.9

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: 4.0

• Business has been shrinking. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
• Carriage Services, Inc. business trend isn't so stable. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 7.3

• CSV profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually hardly sufficient. They stand worse than most rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be excellent. It's great when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually very good. They remain excellent in relation to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be very good in relation to total revenues. They're still better than most 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 below average when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 8.0

• Carriage Services, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been a slight improvement compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a normal step, which has been slightly worse than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a normal pace, which compares encouraging in relation to peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a very good tempo. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an extremely fast speed. It was slightly better than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been extremely high, and similar to peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at an extremely fast rhythm in past years. It's been rather normal in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

• CSV had to pay a lot of income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been mediocre against 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: 7.8

• Carriage Services, Inc. usually gets 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 close to average when compared to similar companies.
• There's usually excellent profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks almost average when measured 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 below average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 7.1

• CSV usually uses a modest portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments isn't too high. It stands below average when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping its operating capabilities up to date, which is similar to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid run-of-the-mill dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat worse than competitors.
• Has somewhat increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• Dividend payments usually represent a minor portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks slightly better than comparable companies.
• The company usually reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains excellent 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 excellent in relation to rivals.
• We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.4

• Carriage Services, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a huge portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
• Roughly a third of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have claims on the company. It remains somewhat better 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 less than a dollar 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 extremely few cents of cash and equivalents, which is bottom tier against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately somewhat less than one month of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a weak position compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
• On average pays suppliers before a month since the purchase. It ranks weak when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers less than one month before charging its customers, so there's little money invested in working capital. It's in a very 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 worse than most rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been low when measured against loans taken. Even cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than seven 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 in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still bottom tier against peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.0

• Carriage Services, Inc. looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be encouraging 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 disappointment compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated some good free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands well ranked against 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 great 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 a slight improvement compared to peer ventures.
• The company is largely indebted. It should focus on loan repayment before rewarding stockholders. It looks worse than most similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 lacking 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 better than most peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned good money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be more than average in relation 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: 6.0

---

Awarener score: 6.9

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!