Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Computer Task Group, Incorporated (CTG)

Awarener score: 6.8

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

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 slightly shrinking. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
  • Computer Task Group, Incorporated business trend stability is very good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks slightly better than rivals.

Margins score: 4.7

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

Growth score: 5.4

  • Computer Task Group, Incorporated couldn't always profit -on goods and services sold- in the past years. It's been a disappointment compared to competitors.
  • In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very good step, which has been better than most comparable firms.
  • Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at an excellent pace, which compares great when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at an excellent tempo. It turns to be excellent in relation to similar stocks.
  • In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at an excellent speed. It was better than most rivals.
  • In the previous years, the firm had at least a total net loss, and last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
  • The company lost money at least once in the past years. It's been a disappointment compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 3.0

  • CTG 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: 6.5

  • Computer Task Group, Incorporated usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
  • The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain close to average when compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually some profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks almost average when measured against 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.8

  • CTG 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 almost average when measured against rival firms.
  • The company is usually replacing most of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, and saving a little funds for something else, which is encouraging 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 barely enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in slightly more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains in good shape 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 a slight improvement compared to rivals.
  • We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 5.9

  • Computer Task Group, Incorporated 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 more than average in relation to peer companies.
  • The company has roughly double short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are normally not an issue. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a quarter of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have some claims on the company. It remains slightly worse than 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 more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three 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.
  • On average pays suppliers before a month from the purchase. It ranks below average 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.
  • Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands slightly better than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been very good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than two years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.
  • Revenues are excellent in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. Low property, plant, and equipment requirements, allows the company to keep more money to reward stockholders in the long run. It looks a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is huge considering yearly sales, which is great. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still top-notch against peer companies.

Valuation score: 8.1

  • Computer Task Group, Incorporated looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be top tier 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 good shape compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands well ranked against similar companies.
  • The company usually generates much more 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 very interesting. It's still more than average in relation to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has slightly enlarged the pool of investors by issuing new shares. The pie of earnings will now be split among a little 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 slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks very cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, or a weak financial position, among others. If that isn't the case, the current stock price might be very attractive. It ranks top tier when measured against peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being very poor. It looks excellent in relation to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value might be more than reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains well ranked against peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business earned great money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be top tier when measured against 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 in good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.6


CTG logos

Company at a glance: Computer Task Group, Incorporated (CTG)

Sector, industry: Technology, Information Technology Services

Market Cap: 0.10 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.38 billions

Computer Task Group, Incorporated, together with its subsidiaries, offers information and technology services in North America, South America, Western Europe, and India. It operates through three segments: North America IT Solutions and Services, Europe IT Solutions and Services, and Non-Strategic Technology Services. The company offers business process transformation solutions, which include advisory, data strategy, digital workplace, enterprise platforms, information disclosure, and regulatory and compliance services; technology transformation solutions, such as application development, automation, cloud, data management, enterprise platform implementation, and testing services; and operations transformation solutions consisting of application support, IT operations support, cloud, and infrastructure. It also provides staffing services, including managed staffing, staff augmentation, and volume staffing services. The company serves financial services, healthcare, manufacturing, and energy industries, as well as technology service providers. Computer Task Group, Incorporated was incorporated in 1966 and is headquartered in Amherst, New York.

Awarener score: 6.8

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