Log in
Log in
Or log in with
GoogleGoogle
Twitter Twitter
Facebook Facebook
Apple Apple     
Sign up
Or log in with
GoogleGoogle
Twitter Twitter
Facebook Facebook
Apple Apple     
  1. Homepage
  2. Equities
  3. Canada
  4. CANADIAN NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE
  5. Curaleaf Holdings, Inc.
  6. Ratings
    CURA   CA23126M1023

CURALEAF HOLDINGS, INC.

(CURA)
  Report
Delayed CANADIAN NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE  -  03:59 2022-12-02 pm EST
9.800 CAD    0.00%
12/01Wedbush Initiating Coverage of U.S. Cannabis: "Setting Stage for Greener Pastures:
MT
11/22Curaleaf Holdings, Inc. Celebrates Opening of New Dispensaries in Orlando and Miami, FL
CI
11/15The Property Line : A Budding Future For Cannabis CRE With Curaleaf (Podcast)
AQ
SummaryQuotesChartsNewsRatingsCalendarCompanyFinancialsConsensusRevisionsFunds 
Investment
Trading
ESG Refinitiv
C-
Financials
Sales Growth
Growth rating is based on the evolution of the turnover of the company between the last year and the three coming years according to consensus estimates
Earnings Growth
This rating is based on the expected evolution of the annual net Earnings Per Share (EPS) according to the estimates of the analysts who cover the company. The objective is to identify companies with dynamic earnings growth.
-
EBITDA / Sales
This rating is based on the EBITDA margin in relation to the company's sales, based on past performance and analysts' estimates for the coming years. Unlike profitability (final net profitability), the EBITDA margin does not include taxes, interest and depreciation. The higher this ratio, the better the rating.
Profitability
Profitability rating is based on net margin of the company for the current year and the next one according to consensus estimates
Finances
Finances rating is based on the evolution of the net debt of the company (debt or cash) and its Ebitda, compared to its revenue
Valuation
P/E ratio
Price Earnings Ratio rating compared the company’s current share price to its per-share earnings for the current fiscal year and the next one
-
EV / Sales
Valuation rating is based on the ratio between enterprise value and its turnover for the current fiscal year and the next one
Price to Book
This rating is based on the ratio of the company's share price to its book value, based on past performance and analysts' estimates for the coming years. The lower the ratio, the better the rating.
Price to Free Cash Flow
This rating is based on the ratio between the company's share price and the free cash flow per share generated by its activities, based on the past and analysts' estimates for the coming years. The lower the ratio, the better the rating.
-
Yield
"Yield" rating is based on the dividend relative to its share price
-
Momentum
Turnover review 12m
Revenue revisions (one year) rating is based on the evolution of revenue revisions of the company for the current fiscal year and the next one
Turnover review 4m
Revenue revisions (four months) rating is based on the evolution of revenue revisions of the company for the current fiscal year and the next one
Turnover review 7 days
The rating is based on the evolution of the company's revenue estimates based on historical and analysts' estimates for the coming years. In the last 7 days, the more the sales estimates have been revised upwards from a relative point of view, the better the rating.
Earnings revision 12m
EPS revisions (one year) rating is based on the evolution of EPS (earnings per share) revisions of the company for the current fiscal year and the next one
Earnings revision 4m
EPS revisions (four months) rating is based on the evolution of EPS (earnings per share) revisions of the company for the current fiscal year and the next one
Consensus
Analyst Opinion
Consensus rating is based on analyst recommendations
Potential Price Target
Potential rating is based on the average target price fixed by the consensus from Thomson Reuters
Price target revision 4m
This rating is based on the evolution of the analysts' price target over the last 4 months. The objective is to identify the companies whose price target has changed the most. The more positive this variation is, the better the rating.
4m Revision of opinion
This rating is based on the evolution of the general opinion of analysts over the last 4 months. The objective is to identify the companies for which the analysts' consensus has changed the most. The more positive the change, the better the rating.
12m Revision of opinion
This rating is based on the evolution of the general opinion of analysts over the last 12 months. The objective is to identify the companies for which the analyst consensus has changed the most. The more positive the change, the better the rating.
Business Predictability
Analyst Coverage
This rating is based on the number of analysts present within the consensus as well as the number of numerical estimates concerning the future evolution of the company's business analysed. The more a company is followed, the better the rating.
Divergence of Estimates
Business Predictability rating is based on the dispersion of analysts' estimates on the evolution of the company business in the coming years (range estimates)
Divergence of analysts' opinions
This rating measures the dispersion of the different opinions of the analysts who make up the consensus. The smaller the difference of opinion, the better the rating.
Divergence of Target Price
This rating measures the dispersion of the different price targets of the analysts who make up the consensus. The lower the target divergence, the better the rating.
Earnings quality
Earnings quality rating is based on quality of past earnings released by the company compared to analysts' estimates
Environment
Emissions
The emission reduction score measures a company’s commitment and effectiveness towards reducing environmental emissions in its production and operational processes.
Innovation
The innovation score reflects a company’s capacity to reduce the environmental costs and burdens for its customers, thereby creating new market opportunities through new environmental technologies and processes, or eco-designed products.
Use of resources
The resource use score reflects a company’s performance and capacity to reduce the use of materials, energy or water, and to find more eco-efficient solutions by improving supply chain management.
Social
Social commitment
The community score measures the company’s commitment to being a good citizen, protecting public health and respecting business ethics.
Human Rights
The human rights score measures a company’s effectiveness in terms of respecting fundamental human rights conventions.
Product liability
The product responsibility score reflects a company’s capacity to produce quality goods and services, integrating the customer’s health and safety, integrity and data privacy.
Human Resources
The workforce score measures a company’s effectiveness in terms of providing job satisfaction, a healthy and safe workplace, maintaining diversity and equal opportunities and development opportunities for its workforce.
Governance
CSR Strategy
The CSR strategy score reflects a company’s practices to communicate that it integrates economic (financial), social and environmental dimensions into its day-to-day decision-making processes.
Management
The management score measures a company’s commitment and effectiveness towards following best practice corporate governance principles.
Shareholders
The shareholders score measures a company’s effectiveness towards equal treatment of shareholders and the use of anti-takeover devices.
Controversy
Controversies
The ESG controversies score is calculated based on 23 ESG controversy topics. During the year, if a scandal occurs, the company involved is penalized and this affects their overall ESGC score and grading. The impact of the event may still be seen in the following year if there are new developments related to the negative event. For example, lawsuits, ongoing legislation disputes or fines. All new media materials are captured as the controversy progresses. The controversies score also addresses the market cap bias from which large cap companies suffer, as they attract more media attention than smaller cap companies.
Technical analysis
Short Term Timing
Short Term Timing rating is defined according to the positioning of the last closed trading price, within the area between the short term support and resistance on the basis of technical analysis in daily data
Middle Term Timing
Mid-Term Timing rating is defined according to the positioning of the last closed trading price, within the area between the mid-term support and resistance on the basis of technical analysis in daily data
Long Term Timing
Long Term Timing rating is defined according to the positioning of the last closed trading price, within the area between the long term support and resistance on the basis of technical analysis in daily data
RSI
RSI rating is based on the ranking of the security in the panel studied according to the mathematical indicator RSI 14 period
Bollinger Spread
Bollinger Bands rating is based on the ranking of the security in the panel studied according to the spread of the Bollinger bands
Unusual Volumes
Abnormal Volumes rating is based on the ranking of the security in the panel studied according to volume of the last session compared to an average session
Summary
  • On the basis of various fundamental qualitative criteria, the company appears to be particularly poorly ranked from a medium and long-term investment perspective.
  • From a short-term investment perspective, the company presents a deteriorated fundamental configuration.
  • The company's Refinitiv ESG score, based on a relative ranking of the company within its sector, comes out particularly poor.
Strengths
  • Before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, the company's margins are particularly high.
  • Analysts have a positive opinion on this stock. Average consensus recommends overweighting or purchasing the stock.
  • The average target price set by analysts covering the stock is above current prices and offers a tremendous appreciation potential.
Weaknesses
  • The company has insufficient levels of profitability.
  • With an enterprise value anticipated at 5.61 times the sales for the current fiscal year, the company turns out to be overvalued.
  • The company appears highly valued given the size of its balance sheet.
  • For the last twelve months, the trend in sales revisions has been clearly going down, which emphasizes downgraded expectations from the analysts.
  • The sales outlook for the group was lowered in the last twelve months. This change in forecast points out a decline in activity as well as pessimistic analyses of the company.
  • For the past year, analysts have significantly revised downwards their profit estimates.
  • For the last four months, earnings estimated by analysts have been revised downwards with respect to the next two years.
  • Over the past four months, analysts' average price target has been revised downwards significantly.
  • Sales estimates for the next fiscal years vary from one analyst to another. This clearly highlights a lack of visibility into the company's future activity.
  • The price targets of analysts who cover the stock differ significantly. This implies difficulties in evaluating the company and its business.
  • Financial statements have repeatedly disappointed market stakeholders. Most often, they were below expectations.
Ratings chart - Surperformance
ESG Chart (Refinitiv)
Sector Pharmaceuticals
1st Jan change Capi. (M$)Investor RatingESG
CURALEAF HOLDINGS, INC.-13.27%5 219
C-
JOHNSON & JOHNSON4.57%467 679
C+
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY35.67%356 089
C+
ABBVIE INC.20.87%289 331
C+
NOVO NORDISK A/S22.04%285 887
A-
PFIZER, INC.-13.78%285 774
C+
MERCK & CO., INC.43.58%278 995
B
ROCHE HOLDING AG-18.69%270 669
A
ASTRAZENECA PLC28.81%212 164
C+
NOVARTIS AG4.81%192 650
B-
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY30.12%180 080
A-
AMGEN INC.26.91%152 342
A-
SANOFI-3.17%112 783
B
GILEAD SCIENCES, INC.22.61%111 665
A
CSL LIMITED3.84%98 736
A-
MERCK KGAA-21.87%80 851
A
More Results