Fundamental analysis: Cvent Holding Corp. (CVT)

Awarener score: 4.4

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

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: a result could not be reached

Business growth could not be estimated, due to not enough input data. It's been unavailable to compare with peer companies.
Cvent Holding Corp. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 4.7

CVT profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually excellent. They stand slightly worse than rival companies.
Business profit on sales tends to be meagre. It's similar to 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 very poor in relation to total revenues. They're still slightly better than similar companies.
Profits -before income taxes- are usually very poor considering total sales, and remain similar to rivals.
Total net profit tends to be very poor when confronted to sales. Company stands similar to comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

Cvent Holding Corp. has an unknown gross margin growth, as there is not enough data to analyze. It's been impossible to compare to competitors.
In recent years, the firm hasn't always been able to profit from operations, which has been bottom tier against comparable firms.
EBITDA growth is unknown due to insufficient inputs, which compares unknown 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: 4.0

CVT 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 some portion of revenues. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
The company grows modestly in relation to research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.8

Cvent Holding Corp. usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to peer firms.
The company normally gets low proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain a slight improvement compared to similar companies.
Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually lacking. It ranks encouraging in relation to 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 almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 4.2

CVT usually uses a portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is rather normal. It stands almost average when measured against rival firms.
The company is usually replacing part of the property, plant, and equipment that gets old, keeping some funds for something else. It can't keep forever, which is below 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 enlarges quite a bit 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 rather normal in relation to rivals.
We do not have sufficient data to comment on buybacks and their sustainability. It still looks dubious against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.1

Cvent Holding Corp. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a very large portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be major difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be weak when measured against peer companies.
The company has somewhat lower short-term resources than short-term obligations. Unless it's part of the business model, there might some liquidity concerns. 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 better than rival firms.
Controlled resources might be only very slowly turned into cash and equivalents, which is riskier. It looks last-in-rank when measured against rivals.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has almost another of 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 half of cash and equivalents, which is worse than most similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks below average when measured against peers.
Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
On average, it takes less than three months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly worse than peers.
On average pays suppliers during the first couple of weeks from the purchase. It ranks substantially worse 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 in a weak position compared to similar companies.
Has usually been losing money on the business, so net interest expenses must be paid by increasing borrowings, which is unsustainable in the long run. The situation is very risky for both creditors and shareholders, profitability must increase. It stands bottom tier against rival firms.
Business earnings have usually been reasonable when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than five years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks almost average when measured against comparable enterprises.
Revenues are excellent in relation to property, plant, and equipment required to operate. This metric is likely dependent on the industry the company operates in. Low property, plant, and equipment requirements, allows the company to keep more money to reward stockholders in the long run. It looks in good shape compared to similar firms.
Resource exploitation is low when yearly sales are considered, business volume must be significantly increased. This metric is normally tied to the industry where the firm belongs. It's still mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.5

Cvent Holding Corp. 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.
In the past twelve months, the company neither generated nor consumed funds. Whatever funds it could generate, it reinvested in the business, which stands slightly better than similar companies.
In the past years the company barely generated enough genuine funds to cover up for its business needs. Business prospects should improve to be in a better position to reward investors. It's still similar to 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 rather normal in relation to peer ventures.
The company has neither net debt nor net cash. It may borrow extra money if it wishes so, or start cumulating cash for future uses. It looks somewhat worse than 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 lacking compared to rival firms.
The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is 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 better than peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business lost some 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 close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.6

Company at a glance: Cvent Holding Corp. (CVT)

Sector, industry: Technology, Software—Application

Market Cap: 4.08 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.63 billions

Cvent Holding Corp. provides a cloud-based enterprise event marketing, management, and hospitality platform for meetings and events value ecosystem in North America and internationally. The company's Event Cloud solutions consists of event marketing and management services that enables marketers and planners to maximize engagement and ROI from their virtual in-person or hybrid events. Its Hospitality Cloud solutions provides hotels, venues, and destinations with online marketing solutions for marketing their events business to planners; and software solutions that automate the events sales cycle and enhancing collaboration with planners to design and manage events. In addition, company provides hospitality cloud online marketing solutions, which enables suppliers to advertise and market on venue sourcing networks, including CSN, Cvent SpeedRFP, and Cvent Wedding Spot; hospitality cloud software solutions, such as hotels, destinations, and venues software solutions to automate and enhance how they sell and execute events; and network effect. The company sells its platform primarily through a direct inside sales team. Cvent Holding Corp. was founded in 1999 and is headquartered in Tysons, Virginia.