Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Cutera, Inc. (CUTR)

Awarener score: 5.2

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

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 growing at a good pace. It's been similar to peer companies.
  • Cutera, Inc. business shows some variation, there's some risk. It looks slightly worse than rivals.

Margins score: 4.3

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

Growth score: 1.7

  • Cutera, Inc. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been close to average when 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: 5.0

  • CUTR 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 low portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
  • The company shows business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands a slight improvement compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 2.8

  • Cutera, Inc. usually gets meagre returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets meagre proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • There's usually bottom profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks substantially worse when measured against competitors.
  • In the past, got low 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 encouraging in relation to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.4

  • CUTR 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 encouraging in relation to rival firms.
  • The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is more than average 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 usually significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more 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 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: 5.4

  • Cutera, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a small portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. It isn't that a significant risk of liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be below average 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 close to average when compared to similar firms.
  • Most resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have more claims on the company than shareholders. Unless the company is a financial institution that takes deposits, the situation might be very risky. It remains bottom tier against rival firms.
  • A substantial portion of resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is better for liquidity. It looks encouraging 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 close to average when compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is slightly better than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on a two-months credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
  • Normally has approximately six months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks more than average in relation to industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers four months or more before charging its customers, so there's significant money invested in working capital. It's a slight improvement compared to 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.
  • 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 a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Resource exploitation is reasonable when yearly sales are considered. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still somewhat better than peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.4

  • Cutera, 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 in a very weak position compared to peers.
  • In the past twelve months, the company consumed funds. Either it reinvested in the business or genuine fund generation might be challenging, which stands slightly worse than similar companies.
  • In the past years the company hardly generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve enough to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still similar to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has barely rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up impressive in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company has barely more debt than cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks mediocre against 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 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 a slight improvement compared to rival firms.
  • The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is extremely high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains worse than most peer firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the operating business lost significant money. It happens to be similar to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a somewhat low 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: 3.9


CUTR logos

Company at a glance: Cutera, Inc. (CUTR)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Medical Devices

Market Cap: 0.68 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.25 billions

Cutera, Inc., a medical device company, researches, develops, manufactures, markets, and services laser and energy-based aesthetics systems for practitioners worldwide. The company offers Secret PRO, a device that utilizes fractional CO2 for skin resurfacing and radio frequency (RF) microneedling for deep dermal remodeling; truSculpt flex, a bio-electrical muscle stimulation device to treat patients at all fitness levels; excel V+, a vascular and benign pigmented lesion treatment platform; truSculpt iD, for the non-surgical body sculpting market; and Secret RF, a fractional RF microneedling system for tissue coagulation and hemostasis. It also provides enlighten platform, a laser system that is used for tattoo removal, as well as to treat benign pigmented lesions and acne scars; excel HR platform, a hair removal solution for various skin types; and xeo platform, a multi-application platform on which a customer purchases hand piece applications for the removal of unwanted hair, treatment of vascular lesions, and skin revitalization by treating discoloration, fine lines, and laxity. In addition, the company distributes skincare products; and offers post-warranty services through extended service contracts or direct billing. Further, it provides pulsed light hand pieces for the treatment of discoloration, hair removal, and vascular treatments; and Pearl and Pearl Fractional hand pieces, as well as sells hand piece refills, cycle refills, consumable tips, and marketing brochures through the company's website. The company markets and sells its products through direct sales force to plastic surgeons, dermatologists, gynecologists, family practitioners, primary care physicians, and other qualified practitioners, as well as for physicians performing aesthetic treatments in non-medical offices. Cutera, Inc. was incorporated in 1988 and is headquartered in Brisbane, California.

Awarener score: 5.2

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