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

---

Fundamental analysis: Deere & Company (DE)

Awarener score: 6.7

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 growing at a low pace. It's been more than average in relation to peer companies.
• Deere & Company business trend stability is run-of-the-mill. The higher the stability, the lower the risk. It looks somewhat better than rivals.

Margins score: 7.5

• DE profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually hardly sufficient. They stand better than most rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be excellent. It's top tier 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 top-notch against similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually very good considering total sales, and remain top tier when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be very good when confronted to sales. Company stands top tier when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 6.7

• Deere & Company profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at a normal pace. It's been in good shape compared to competitors.
• In recent years, earnings -on operations- have been growing at a good step, which has been slightly worse than comparable firms.
• Profits -available to repay debt and purchase properties- have been growing at a normal pace, which compares below average when measured against peer enterprises.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- have been growing at a good tempo. It turns to be lacking compared to similar stocks.
• In past years, profits -before income taxes- grew at a good speed. It was slightly worse than rivals.
• In the previous years, growth trend on total net profit has been good, and similar to peer companies.
• Earnings per share have grown at a good rhythm in past years. It's been rather normal in relation to industry peers.

Miscellaneous score: 7.3

• DE had to pay some income taxes in relation to profits made in the past years. It's been slightly worse than peers.
• Research and development expenses consume a very little portion of revenues. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
• The company shows good business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands lacking compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 8.8

• Deere & Company usually gets excellent returns on the resources it controls. It proves encouraging in relation to 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 paramount. It ranks top tier 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 similar to comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 5.9

• DE usually uses a very large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is heavy. It stands similar to rival firms.
• The company is usually investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to improve its operating capabilities, which is more than average in relation to industry peers.
• In the past twelve months it paid somewhat low dividends, considering the current stock price. It came somewhat worse than competitors.
• Has increased dividend payments in the past years. Business prospects may have improved. The company has behaved close to average when compared to similar firms.
• The company usually uses some portion of genuine funds generated to pay dividends. Dividend payments should be safe, unless business prospects take a nosedive. Sustainability looks worse than most 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 good shape compared to rivals.
• The company uses somewhat more funds to reward investors than it can genuinely generate, so some part of them is paid out of existing cash or by borrowing money, both of which will eventually reach a limit. Either business somewhat improves, or rewards will probably not be sustained at this pace. It still looks substantially worse when measured against competitors.

Balance Sheet score: 4.5

• Deere & Company intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a modest portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be some difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be similar to peer companies.
• The company has roughly double short-term resources than short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are normally not an issue. It turns to be rather normal in relation to similar firms.
• A substantial part of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have as many claims on the company as shareholders. The situation is somewhat risky. It remains worse than most rival firms.
• Controlled resources can be made into cash within reason, which is quite good for liquidity. It looks below average 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 in good shape compared to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has few cents of cash and equivalents, which is mediocre against similar enterprises.
• Usually, sales are on many months credit. It still ranks last-in-rank when measured against peers.
• Normally has approximately three months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as a slight improvement compared to competitors.
• On average, it takes plenty of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
• On average pays suppliers approximately four months or higher after the purchase. It ranks top tier when measured against industry peers.
• The company pays its suppliers plenty of months before charging its customers, so there's a lot of money invested in working capital. It's in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• To what extent normalized EBITDA covers interest expenses is not known. It stands impossible to compare against rival firms.
• Business earnings have usually been low when measured against loans taken. Even cutting back reinvesting in the business, it could take more than seven years to repay the obligations with current profitability. It ranks weak when measured against comparable enterprises.
• Revenues are very good 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 rather normal in relation 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 mediocre against peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.4

• Deere & Company looks somewhat 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 in a weak position 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 somewhat worse than similar companies.
• The company usually generates somewhat 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 reasonable. It's still below average 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 in good shape compared to peer ventures.
• The company is indebted, it should focus on loan repayment. It looks somewhat worse than similar enterprises.
• Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation might be more or less reasonable, but hardly cheap. It ranks similar to 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 disappointment compared to rival firms.
• The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is really 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 earned some money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be similar 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 close to average when compared to peer companies.

Total score: 6.5

---

Awarener score: 6.7

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!