Fundamental analysis: CTS Corporation (CTS)

Awarener score: 6.2

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

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: 5.5

Business has been slightly shrinking. It's been almost average when measured against peer companies.
CTS Corporation business trend stability is good. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat worse than rivals.

Margins score: 6.5

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

Growth score: 1.9

CTS Corporation profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a very low pace. It's been close to average when compared to competitors.
In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a very low step, which has been slightly worse than 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: 6.7

CTS had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been somewhat worse than peers.
Research and development expenses consume a sparse portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
The company shows business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a slight improvement compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 6.8

CTS Corporation usually gets good returns on the resources it controls. It proves similar to peer firms.
The company normally gets sufficient proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain rather normal in relation 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 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.6

CTS usually uses a sparse portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is modest. It stands more than average in relation to 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 below average when measured against industry peers.
In the past twelve months it paid very little dividends, considering the current stock price. It came mediocre against competitors.
In recent years, has slightly cut back dividend payments. The company has behaved in a weak position compared to similar firms.
Dividend payments usually represent a slight portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks somewhat better than comparable companies.
The company usually neither enlarges nor reduces the pool of investors, resulting in approximately the same mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a slight improvement 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 excellent in relation to rivals.
The company uses a low portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can most likely be sustained. It still looks encouraging in relation to competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 6.2

CTS Corporation intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
The company has more than enough short-term resources to face short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are non-significant. It turns to be rather normal in relation 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 slightly worse than 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 substantially worse 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 enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
Normally has approximately somewhat more than two months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in good shape compared to competitors.
On average, it takes higher than four months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be top-notch against peers.
On average pays suppliers longer than two months after the purchase. It ranks almost 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 excellent in relation to similar companies.
Net interest expenses consume a non-significant portion of usual business earnings, and are therefore extremely easily to bear. It stands well ranked against 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 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 lacking compared to similar firms.
Resource exploitation is quite good when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 6.0

CTS Corporation looks somewhat expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be below average 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 lacking compared to peers.
In the past twelve months, the company generated excellent free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most 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 more than average in relation to industry firms.
In the past twelve months, the company hasn't 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 more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks slightly better than similar enterprises.
Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation is high. Substantial improvement expectations are already in the stock price, which is somewhat risky. It ranks weak when measured against peer companies.
Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a three or four 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 somewhat worse than peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be almost average when measured against industry peers.
In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a modest earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still lacking compared to peer companies.

Total score: 5.8

Company at a glance: CTS Corporation (CTS)

Sector, industry: Technology, Electronic Components

Market Cap: 1.47 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.59 billions

CTS Corporation manufactures and sells sensors, actuators, and connectivity components in North America, Europe, and Asia. The company provides sensors and actuators for use in passenger or commercial vehicles; connectivity components for telecommunications infrastructure, information technology, and other high-speed applications; switches, temperature sensors, and potentiometers supplied to multiple markets; and fabricated piezoelectric materials and substrates used primarily in medical, industrial, aerospace and defense, and information technology markets. In addition, the company sells and markets its products through its sales engineers, independent manufacturers' representatives, and distributors. CTS Corporation was founded in 1896 and is headquartered in Lisle, Illinois.