Awarener easy mode Awarener analytic mode

Fundamental analysis: Curtiss-Wright Corporation (CW)

Awarener score: 6.9

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 (Superb) and growth (Poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Excellent).

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: 6.5

  • Business has been shrinking. It's been below average when measured against peer companies.
  • Curtiss-Wright Corporation business trend is extremely stable, which is best. It looks top-notch against rivals.

Margins score: 7.7

  • CW profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually sufficient. They stand well ranked against rival companies.
  • Business profit on sales tends to be excellent. It's great when measured against competitors.
  • Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually good. They remain excellent 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 great when measured against rivals.
  • Total net profit tends to be very good when confronted to sales. Company stands great when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 3.3

  • Curtiss-Wright Corporation profit growth -on goods and services sold- has been almost stagnant. It's been in a weak position 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.
  • Profits growth -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been almost stagnant, which compares below average when measured against peer enterprises.
  • Growth on earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been almost stagnant. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar stocks.
  • In past years, growth on profits -before income taxes- was almost stagnant. It was somewhat worse than rivals.
  • In the previous years, growth on total net profit has been almost null, and almost average when measured against peer companies.
  • Earnings per share have grown at a very low rhythm in past years. It's been close to average when compared to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 6.0

  • CW had to pay substantial income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been mediocre against peers.
  • Research and development expenses consume a very little portion of revenues. It's more than average in relation to competitors.
  • The company grows sparsely in relation to research and development efforts. It stands close to average when compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 9.0

  • Curtiss-Wright Corporation usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves more than average in relation to peer firms.
  • The company normally gets excellent proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in good shape compared to similar companies.
  • There's usually excellent profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks more than average in relation to competitors.
  • In the past, got excellent 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 great when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 6.4

  • CW 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 great 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 substantially worse 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.
  • Has increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
  • Dividend payments usually represent a slight portion of genuine funds generation and are most likely safe. Sustainability looks well ranked against comparable companies.
  • The company usually significantly reduces the pool of investors, resulting in fewer mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains impressive in relation 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 significant portion of genuine fund generation to reward investors, which can probably be sustained for as long as business doesn't turn sour. It still looks encouraging in relation to competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.2

  • Curtiss-Wright Corporation 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 substantially worse when measured against peer companies.
  • The company has more short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns shouldn't be an issue. It turns to be in a weak position compared to similar firms.
  • Roughly a third of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have claims on the company. It remains mediocre against rival firms.
  • Most controlled resources take time to be turned into cash and equivalents, which is somewhat risky. It looks substantially worse when measured against rivals.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has roughly another of cash and short-term receivables. It's lacking compared to peer firms.
  • For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and equivalents, which is somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
  • Usually, sales are on somewhat more than three months credit. It still ranks substantially worse when measured against peers.
  • Normally has approximately four months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as rather normal in relation to competitors.
  • On average, it takes higher than six months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be slightly worse than peers.
  • On average pays suppliers longer than two months after the purchase. It ranks encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • The company pays its suppliers six months or more before charging its customers, so there's abundant money invested in working capital. It's rather normal in relation to similar companies.
  • Net interest expenses consume a minor portion of usual business earnings, and are easily bearable. It stands slightly better than rival firms.
  • Business earnings have usually been good when measured against loans taken. Cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take less than three 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 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 slightly worse than peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.4

  • Curtiss-Wright Corporation looks expensive in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be similar to 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 generated some slightly better free funds in relation to the stock price, which stands somewhat better than similar companies.
  • The company usually generates reasonably 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, the current valuation might be fair. It's still encouraging in relation to industry firms.
  • In the past twelve months, the company has rewarded investors, considering both dividends and share on the pie of earnings. It came up excellent in relation to peer ventures.
  • The company is somewhat indebted, loan repayment needs to be taken into account. It looks somewhat worse 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 similar to peer companies.
  • Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a high 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 encouraging in relation to industry peers.
  • In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a good earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. It's still in good shape compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.1


CW logos

Company at a glance: Curtiss-Wright Corporation (CW)

Sector, industry: Industrials, Aerospace & Defense

Market Cap: 6.64 billions

Revenues TTM: 2.56 billions

Curtiss-Wright Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, provides engineered products, solutions, and services to the aerospace, defense, general industrial, and power generation markets worldwide. worldwide. It operates through three segments: Aerospace & Industrial, Defense Electronics, and Naval & Power. The Aerospace & Industrial segment offers industrial vehicle products, such as electronic throttle control devices, joysticks, and transmission shifters; sensors, controls and electro-mechanical actuation components used in commercial and military aircraft; and surface technology services, including shot peening, laser peening, and coatings. The Defense Electronics segment provides commercial off-the-shelf embedded computing board-level modules, data acquisition and flight test instrumentation equipment, integrated subsystems, instrumentation and control systems, turret aiming and stabilization products, and weapons handling systems; avionics and electronics; flight test equipment; and aircraft data management solutions. The Naval & Power segment offers hardware, pumps, pump seals, control rod drive mechanisms, valves, fastening systems, specialized containment doors, airlock hatches, spent fuel management products, and fluid sealing products for nuclear power plants and nuclear equipment manufacturers; and naval propulsion and auxiliary equipment, including coolant pumps, power-dense compact motors, generators, steam turbines, valves, and secondary propulsion systems, as well as ship repair and maintenance services primarily to the U.S. navy. Curtiss-Wright Corporation was founded in 1929 and is headquartered in Davidson, North Carolina.

Awarener score: 6.9

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 (Superb) and growth (Poor), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Excellent).