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

---

Fundamental analysis: DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc. (DMAC)

Awarener score: 1.0

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: 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.
• DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc. business stability could not be estimated, due to insufficient input data. It looks we cannot compare it to rivals.

Margins score: 8.5

• DMAC profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually destitute. They stand worse than most rival companies.
• Business profit on sales tends to be huge. It's top tier when measured against competitors.
• Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually huge. They remain impressive in relation to peers.
• Earnings -before income taxes and interests on loans taken- tend to be huge in relation to total revenues. They're still top-notch against similar companies.
• Profits -before income taxes- are usually huge considering total sales, and remain top tier when measured against rivals.
• Total net profit tends to be huge when confronted to sales. Company stands top tier when measured against comparable firms.

Growth score: 1.0

• DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc. 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.
• 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: 1.3

• DMAC 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 huge portion of revenues. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
• Business has been shrinking, despite research and development efforts. It stands in a weak position compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.5

• DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves below average when measured against peer firms.
• The company normally gets extremely poor proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain in a very weak position compared to similar companies.
• There's usually bottom profitability -in relation to owned resources-. It ranks weak when measured against competitors.
• In the past, got very poor 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: 3.0

• DMAC 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 almost average when measured against rival firms.
• The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is encouraging 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 has heavily enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains lacking 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: 7.1

• DiaMedica Therapeutics Inc. has no intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) according to accounting books, which is safest. It happens to be top tier when measured against peer companies.
• The company has plenty short-term resources to face short-term obligations. There're no liquidity concerns. It turns to be impressive in relation to similar firms.
• Almost no resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is great. Company could significantly increase debt if it wished so, to reinvest in business, to buy a smaller company or to reward stockholders. It remains somewhat better than rival firms.
• Most resources controlled are already cash or short-term investments, which is best for liquidity. It looks top tier when measured against rivals.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has plenty of dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's impressive in relation to peer firms.
• For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has plenty of dollars in cash and equivalents, which is top-notch against similar enterprises.
• Days of sales outstanding are not known, out of lack of data. It still ranks unknown against 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.
• To what extent normalized EBITDA covers interest expenses is not known. It stands impossible to compare 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.
• The company didn't have revenues in the past twelve months. It must start having income to take advantage of used resources. It looks in a very weak position compared to similar firms.
• The firm has yet to start reporting any sales. It's still worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 3.2

• DiaMedica Therapeutics 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 a slight improvement compared to peers.
• In the past twelve months, the company consumed lots of funds. Either it reinvested heavily in the business or genuine fund generation might be struggling, which stands worse 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 substantially worse when measured against industry firms.
• In the past twelve months, the company has greatly 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 plenty more stockholders. It came up in a weak position compared to peer ventures.
• This company is sitting in a mountain of cash. It's very well poised to substantially increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks top-notch 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.
• Price-to-Sales ratio is currently an incognita. It looks incomparable with 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 better than peer firms.
• In the past twelve months, the operating business lost plenty of money. It happens to be substantially worse when measured against industry peers.
• In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown an extremely low earnings power ability when measured against the current stock price and financial position. Profitability is significantly in dispute. It's still in a very weak position compared to peer companies.

Total score: 3.7

---

Awarener score: 1.0

Conclusion

Support us!

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

• Donate!