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

---

Fundamental analysis: Codorus Valley Bancorp, Inc. (CVLY)

Awarener score: 5.8

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: 6.0

• Business has been shrinking. It's been weak when measured against peer companies.
• Codorus Valley Bancorp, Inc. business trend stability is excellent. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 7.2

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

Growth score: 3.8

• Codorus Valley Bancorp, Inc. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
• There is not sufficient data to estimate the operating income margin trend, which has been therefore unknown against comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- tended to shrink, which compares substantially worse when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tended to shrink. It turns to be in a very weak position compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a low speed. It was slightly worse than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been low, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a low rhythm in past years. It's been rather normal in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 6.0

• CVLY had to pay sparse income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly better 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: 6.2

• Codorus Valley Bancorp, Inc. usually gets hardly sufficient returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets very good proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain rather normal in relation to similar companies.
• Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually quite good. It ranks below average when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got barely sufficient 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 3.6

• CVLY 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 weak when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually replacing some proportion of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, saving part of the funds for something else, which is almost average when measured against industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid some dividends, considering the current stock price. It came slightly worse than competitors.
• In recent years, has slightly cut back dividend payments. The company has behaved in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• The company generates very few genuine funds. Dividend payments are usually on borrowed money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, future payments could be at risk. Sustainability looks bottom tier against comparable companies.
• The company usually reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer 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 weak position compared to rivals.
• The company generates very few genuine funds. Investor rewards must be paid burning existing cash or by borrowing money, which isn't sustainable in the long run. Unless business prospects improve greatly, stockholder compensation could be at risk. It still looks last-in-rank when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 7.5

• Codorus Valley Bancorp, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a non-significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is safer. It happens to be encouraging in relation to peer companies.
• The company has plenty short-term resources to face short-term obligations. There're no liquidity concerns. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
• Very few resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is very 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 better than rival firms.
• Most controlled resources might be only slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is risky. It looks similar to rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has a lot of 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 a lot of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is slightly worse than similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on cash. It still ranks more than average in relation to 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 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 more than average in relation to comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are modest 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 rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• Resources exploitation is virtually zero, as the firm hardly reports any sales. It's still well ranked against peer companies.

Valuation score: 7.5

• Codorus Valley Bancorp, Inc. looks very cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be almost 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 rather normal in relation to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company generated extraordinary free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands better than most similar companies.
• The company usually consumes plenty 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 outstanding business growth, genuine profitability may be brought into question. It's still weak when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has slightly rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up rather normal in relation to peer ventures.
• This company is a cash hoarder. It might be well poised to substantially increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks slightly worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be reasonable. It ranks below average 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 might be reasonable. It's important both to check this metric through time and to compare it with rival companies. The company remains somewhat worse than 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 below average 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 rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 6.0

---

Awarener score: 5.8

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!