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

---

Fundamental analysis: CytomX Therapeutics, Inc. (CTMX)

Awarener score: 2.4

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: 1.5

• Business has been shrinking at a very fast pace. It's been substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
• CytomX Therapeutics, Inc. business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks slightly better than rivals.

Margins score: 2.5

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

Growth score: 1.1

• CytomX Therapeutics, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been shrinking. It's been in a very weak position compared to competitors.
• In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
• In past years, the company couldn't always turn a profit -available to repay debt and purchase properties-, which compares last-in-rank when measured against peer enterprises.
• In the previous years, the firm couldn't always make a profit -before income taxes and interests on loans taken-. It turns to be a disappointment compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, at least once the company lost money -before income taxes-. It was bottom tier against 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: 2.0

• CTMX had still to pay income taxes, even though in recent past years mostly lost money. It's been bottom tier against peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a substantial portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
• Business has been shrinking, despite research and development efforts. It stands in a very weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.0

• CytomX Therapeutics, Inc. usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves great when measured against peer firms.
• Due to insufficient track history, we were unable to estimate typical returns on invested capital (ROIC). They remain undisclosed in relation to similar companies.
• Normal return on equity (ROE) is unavailable at this time, because of not enough yearly inputs to calculate. It ranks unknown against competitors.
• In the past, got meagre 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.0

• CTMX on average doesn't generate genuine funds, so to buy or replace property, plants and equipment must either burn existing cash or increase debt. It stands great when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually somewhat investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is almost average 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 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 in a very weak position 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: 5.0

• CytomX Therapeutics, Inc. has not disclosed intangibles assets, so we could not reach a meaningful conclusion on this metric. It happens to be a not known variable when measured with peer companies.
• The company has more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• A very minor portion of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is solid. Company could increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains slightly worse than rival firms.
• Most resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is best for liquidity. It looks similar to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's in a very weak position compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on many months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
• Days of inventory outstanding are not known. It comes up as a big question mark against competitors.
• We could not gauge the normal operating cycle of the company. It happens to be a mystery against peers.
• Unfortunately, we had not enough data to estimate the days of payables outstanding. It ranks unknown against industry peers.
• Cash conversion cycle remains unknown, due to not having enough inputs. It's incomparable against similar companies.
• Company earns net interest income on its investments and therefore is in a quite comfortable financial position. It stands top-notch against rival firms.
• Business has usually been operated at a loss. Unless prospects improve, the company is no position to decrease loans taken levels but by additional shareholders' funding. Profitability must improve. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Last twelve months revenues were non-significant in relation to fixed assets. The company must improve income to take advantage of used resources. It looks a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• Resource exploitation is very low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be greatly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 1.7

• CytomX Therapeutics, Inc. reported losses, so valuating it in relation to earnings is meaningless. It happens to be last-in-rank 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 a disappointment compared to peers.
• There is insufficient information on the genuine funds generation capability showed in the past twelve months, which stands as an incognita in relation to similar companies.
• Unfortunately, lack of enough yearly data impaired our ability to estimate the normal earnings power. It's still an unknown variable to measure against 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 in good shape compared to peer ventures.
• We are unsure on the relationship between net financial position and market capitalization of the stock. It looks we will not be able to reach a conclusion regarding similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation has been negative, as the company lost money. It ranks last-in-rank when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very large relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks rather normal in relation to rival firms.
• There's no accounting equity, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains bottom tier against peer firms.
• We could not gauge an alternative metric of earnings power of the past twelve months. It happens to be an interesting metric to relate to industry peers.
• An alternate metric on the usual genuine-funds generation ability could not be provided. It's still unknown against peer companies.

Total score: 2.5

---

Awarener score: 2.4

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!