Fundamental analysis: Duolingo, Inc. (DUOL)

Awarener score: 4.1

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 (Poor).

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

Margins score: 4.0

DUOL profit margins -on goods and services sold- are usually excellent. They stand somewhat better than rival companies.
Business profit on sales tends to be very poor. It's almost average when measured against competitors.
Profits on sales made -available to repay debt and purchase properties- are usually very poor. They remain lacking 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 worse 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

Duolingo, 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: 4.0

DUOL 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 quite a bit of revenues. It's substantially worse when measured against competitors.
The company shows business growth in relation to research and development efforts. It stands rather normal in relation to rival companies.

Profitability score: 3.8

Duolingo, Inc. usually gets low returns on the resources it controls. It proves almost average when measured against peer firms.
The company normally gets meagre proceeds -on the resources directly invested in the business-. They remain close to average when compared to similar companies.
Profitability -in relation to owned resources- is usually lacking. It ranks similar to competitors.
In the past, got low 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: 4.6

DUOL usually uses a large portion of genuine funds generated to buy or replace property, plant, or equipment. The need for reinvestments is large. It stands similar to rival firms.
The company is usually largely investing in new property, plant, and equipment, to expand its operating capabilities, which is top tier 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 significantly enlarges the pool of investors, resulting in more mouths feeding on the pie of profits. It remains close to average when 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 close to average when 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: 6.8

Duolingo, Inc. intangible assets (like brands and goodwill) represent a non-significant portion of resources controlled, according to accounting books, which is safer. It happens to be more than average in relation to 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 excellent in relation to similar firms.
Very few resources controlled were provided for with financial debt. Financial strength is very solid. Company could 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 abundant dollars in cash and short-term receivables. It's excellent in relation to peer firms.
For every dollar of short-term obligations, the company has more than enough dollars in cash and equivalents, which is better than most similar enterprises.
Usually, sales are on a month and a half credit. It still ranks encouraging in relation to peers.
Normally has no inventories. It comes up as impressive in relation to competitors.
On average, it takes approximately two months from the purchase to charging customers. It happens to be somewhat better 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 one month before charging its customers, so there's sparse money invested in working capital. It's close to average when 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 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 close to average when 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: 3.4

Duolingo, 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 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 slightly worse 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 significantly 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 numerous more stockholders. It came up in a weak position compared to peer ventures.
The company has substantial more cash than debt. It might be poised to increase stockholder payments, or to fund new business projects. It looks somewhat better 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 huge relationship. The stock price might rely more on expectations and resources controlled than on anything else. It looks a disappointment compared to rival firms.
The relation between the stock price and accounting book value is extremely high, which may be good or bad depending on context. Run again in analytic mode if you want to dig deeper. The company remains mediocre against 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 rather normal in relation to peer companies.

Total score: 3.9

Company at a glance: Duolingo, Inc. (DUOL)

Sector, industry: Technology, Software—Application

Market Cap: 6.40 billions

Revenues TTM: 0.37 billions

Duolingo, Inc. develops a language-learning website and mobile app in the United States and China. The company offers courses in 40 different languages, including Spanish, English, French, Japanese, German, Italian, Chinese, Portuguese, and others. It also provides a digital language proficiency assessment exam. The company was incorporated in 2011 and is headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.