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

---

Fundamental analysis: Castor Maritime Inc. (CTRM)

Awarener score: 6.1

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: 10.0

• Business has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been top tier when measured against peer companies.
• Castor Maritime Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 8.0

• CTRM profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually sufficient. They stand somewhat better than rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be excellent. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually very good. They remain rather normal 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 very good considering total sales, and remain more than average in relation to rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be excellent when confronted to sales. Company stands great when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 3.6

• Castor Maritime Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an extremely fast pace. It's been impressive in relation to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at an extremely fast step, which has been better than most 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: 9.0

• CTRM managed to pay no income taxes on profits made in the past years, sometimes even got a credit. It's been somewhat 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: 7.0

• Castor Maritime Inc. usually gets very good returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
• The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in good shape compared to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks encouraging 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: 3.4

• CTRM usually uses a very large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is heavy. It stands more than average in relation to rival firms.
• The company is usually heavily investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is top tier 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 has greatly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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: 5.9

• Castor Maritime Inc. has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier when measured against peer companies.
• The company has roughly triple short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are most likely unimportant. It turns to be in good shape 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 well ranked against rival firms.
• Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks more than average in relation to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's excellent in relation to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is better than most similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on a month credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately somewhat less than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a very weak position compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes less than three 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 similar to industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers roughly one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are largely bearable. It stands somewhat better than 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 similar to 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 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 better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.9

• Castor Maritime Inc. looks extremely cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be great 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 impressive in relation to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested significantly in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands worse than most similar companies.
• The company usually consumes more funds than can genuinely generate. Business needs are meet by borrowing money or consuming preexistent cash, which can only keep up until a certain limit. Unless the company is driving business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still substantially worse when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has greatly 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 plenty more stockholders. It came up in a very weak position compared to peer ventures.
• The company is drowned in loans. It almost belongs more to the creditors than the stockholders. The situation may be dire. It looks somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks extremely cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be very hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, a weak financial position, or that earnings aren't representative. If that isn't the case, the stock price could be extremely attractive. It ranks top tier when measured against peer companies.
• Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a low relationship. One common cause includes profitability being poor. It looks excellent in relation to rival firms.
• The stock price is significantly below the accounting book value. Unless profitability is extremely low, the stock may be selling at a large discount. Pay attention to the other key indicators for hints. The company remains top-notch against peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be great when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extreme earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Further analysis is recommended, as the stock might currently be significantly undervalued. It's still excellent in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.7

---

Awarener score: 6.1

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!