Fundamental analysis: DarioHealth Corp. (DRIO)

Awarener score: 3.5

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 (Very poor), the business stability (Very poor) and growth (Excellent), and the company's inclination to return cash to the stockholders (Bottom).

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: 5.5

Business has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been more than average in relation to peer companies.
DarioHealth Corp. business varies frequently, ups and downs are normal. It's risky. It looks worse than most rivals.

Margins score: 2.5

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

Growth score: 2.1

DarioHealth Corp. profit -on goods and services sold- has been growing at an excellent pace. It's been excellent in relation 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: 3.3

DRIO 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 substantial portion of revenues. It's weak when measured against competitors.
The company grows modestly in relation to research and development efforts. It stands lacking compared to rival companies.

Profitability score: 1.8

DarioHealth Corp. usually gets very poor returns on the resources it controls. It proves weak 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.
Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually insufficient. 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 weak when measured against comparable enterprises.

Usage of Funds score: 1.3

DRIO 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 sparsely replacing property, plant, and equipment that gets old, instead using funds in something else. It can't keep forever, which is substantially worse 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 has greatly enlarged the pool of investors in previous years, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains a disappointment 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.
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: 4.8

DarioHealth Corp. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books. There could be difficulties in liquidating them if the company ever gets in financial distress. It happens to be almost average when measured against peer companies.
The company has more than enough short-term resources to face short-term obligations. Liquidity concerns are non-significant. It turns to be a slight improvement compared to similar firms.
Roughly a tenth of resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Creditors have minor claims on the company, and financial position is safe. It remains well ranked against rival firms.
Controlled resources might be turned into cash and equivalents neither fast nor too slow. Liquidity and risk might be run-of-the-mill. It looks similar to rivals.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's a slight improvement compared to peer firms.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is somewhat better than similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on somewhat less than three months credit. It still ranks weak when measured against peers.
Normally has approximately five months of sales worth in inventory. It comes up as in a very weak position compared to competitors.
On average, it takes a lot of months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be worse than most peers.
On average pays suppliers two months after the purchase. It ranks almost average when measured against 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 in a very weak position compared to 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 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.
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 impressive in relation 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 worse than most peer companies.

Valuation score: 5.8

DarioHealth Corp. looks extremely cheap in relation to profits and financial position. It happens to be top tier 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 close to average when 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 better than similar companies.
The company usually consumes much 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 significant 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 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 a disappointment compared 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 well ranked against similar enterprises.
Considering the past twelve months, traditional Price-to-Earnings relation looks extremely cheap. Possible reasons are that the market might be betting current earnings will be very hard to sustain through time, or that the company has very high fund needs, a weak financial position, or that earnings aren't representative. If that isn't the case, the stock price could be extremely attractive. It ranks top tier when measured against peer companies.
Comparing the current stock price with the past twelve-months revenues gives a very high relationship. This is an important metric to check its evolution through time, and to compare to industry peers. It looks close to average when 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 better than peer firms.
In the past twelve months, the operating business earned huge money when compared to the current stock price and financial position. It happens to be top tier when measured against industry peers.
In an alternate metric of bang for the buck, the company has usually shown a 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: 3.4

Company at a glance: DarioHealth Corp. (DRIO)

Sector, industry: Healthcare, Diagnostics & Research

Market Cap: 0.10 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.03 billions

DarioHealth Corp. operates as a digital therapeutics company in the United States, Canada, the European Union, Australia, and New Zealand. The company offers Dario's metabolic solutions to address metabolic health needs, such as diabetes, hypertension, and weight management; Dario Musculoskeletal, which helps to prevent and treat the most common MSK conditions; Dario's behavioral health solution that optimizes access to evidence-based care; chronic condition management solutions; DarioEngage, a proprietary care management platform; and device-specific disposables test strip cartridges, lancets, and blood glucose monitoring systems. It also provides smart glucose meters; bluetooth connected blood pressure cuff; digital scales; biofeedback sensor devices; and diabetes management programs, including lifestyle changes, healthy eating, advanced tracking, and live coaching. The company was formerly known as LabStyle Innovations Corp. and changed its name to DarioHealth Corp. in July 2016. DarioHealth Corp. was incorporated in 2011 and is based in New York, New York.