Switch to:
Also traded in: Germany, Mexico

GuruFocus Financial Strength Rank measures how strong a company’s financial situation is. It is based on these factors

1. The debt burden that the company has as measured by its Interest coverage (current year).
2. Debt to revenue ratio. The lower, the better
3. Altman Z-score.

A company ranks high with financial strength is likely to withstand any business slowdowns and recessions.

Financial Strength : 5/10

vs
industry
vs
history
Cash-to-Debt 0.12
ATW's Cash-to-Debt is ranked lower than
68% of the 65 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.26 vs. ATW: 0.12 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Cash-to-Debt only.
ATW' s Cash-to-Debt Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.04  Med: 0.22 Max: 5.58
Current: 0.12
0.04
5.58
Equity-to-Asset 0.70
ATW's Equity-to-Asset is ranked higher than
79% of the 63 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.56 vs. ATW: 0.70 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Equity-to-Asset only.
ATW' s Equity-to-Asset Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.5  Med: 0.68 Max: 0.86
Current: 0.7
0.5
0.86
Interest Coverage 3.89
ATW's Interest Coverage is ranked lower than
74% of the 34 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 9.46 vs. ATW: 3.89 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Interest Coverage only.
ATW' s Interest Coverage Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 3.89  Med: 61 Max: 173.48
Current: 3.89
3.89
173.48
Piotroski F-Score: 6
Altman Z-Score: 1.77
Beneish M-Score: -3.59
WACC vs ROIC
11.35%
5.37%
WACC
ROIC
GuruFocus Profitability Rank ranks how profitable a company is and how likely the company’s business will stay that way. It is based on these factors:

1. Operating Margin
2. Trend of the Operating Margin (5-year average). The company with an uptrend profit margin has a higher rank.
••3. Consistency of the profitability
4. Piotroski F-Score
5. Predictability Rank•

The maximum rank is 10. A rank of 7 or higher means a higher profitability and may stay that way. A rank of 3 or lower indicates that the company has had trouble to make a profit.

Profitability Rank is not directly related to the Financial Strength Rank. But if a company is consistently profitable, its financial strength will be stronger.

Profitability & Growth : 8/10

vs
industry
vs
history
Operating Margin % 31.77
ATW's Operating Margin % is ranked higher than
84% of the 64 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -10.25 vs. ATW: 31.77 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Operating Margin % only.
ATW' s Operating Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 28.83  Med: 40.47 Max: 50.95
Current: 31.77
28.83
50.95
Net Margin % 27.10
ATW's Net Margin % is ranked higher than
92% of the 65 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -19.85 vs. ATW: 27.10 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Net Margin % only.
ATW' s Net Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 25.99  Med: 34.53 Max: 42.75
Current: 27.1
25.99
42.75
ROE % 7.47
ATW's ROE % is ranked higher than
83% of the 64 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -7.91 vs. ATW: 7.47 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROE % only.
ATW' s ROE % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 7.47  Med: 17.43 Max: 29.52
Current: 7.47
7.47
29.52
ROA % 5.03
ATW's ROA % is ranked higher than
87% of the 67 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -4.80 vs. ATW: 5.03 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROA % only.
ATW' s ROA % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 5.03  Med: 11.93 Max: 23.7
Current: 5.03
5.03
23.7
ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % 7.81
ATW's ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % is ranked higher than
80% of the 66 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -5.53 vs. ATW: 7.81 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % only.
ATW' s ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 7.81  Med: 16.97 Max: 33.16
Current: 7.81
7.81
33.16
3-Year Revenue Growth Rate -0.90
ATW's 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate is ranked higher than
58% of the 57 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -11.20 vs. ATW: -0.90 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate only.
ATW' s 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -1.3  Med: 14.1 Max: 42.5
Current: -0.9
-1.3
42.5
3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate 0.50
ATW's 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate is ranked higher than
57% of the 44 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -6.00 vs. ATW: 0.50 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate only.
ATW' s 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -20.7  Med: 14.5 Max: 64.4
Current: 0.5
-20.7
64.4
3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate -8.40
ATW's 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate is ranked lower than
59% of the 29 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -4.30 vs. ATW: -8.40 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate only.
ATW' s 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -34.9  Med: 8.1 Max: 152.8
Current: -8.4
-34.9
152.8
GuruFocus has detected 5 Warning Signs with Atwood Oceanics Inc $ATW.
More than 500,000 people have already joined GuruFocus to track the stocks they follow and exchange investment ideas.
» ATW's 10-Y Financials

Financials


Revenue & Net Income
Cash & Debt
Operating Cash Flow & Free Cash Flow
Operating Cash Flow & Net Income

» Details

Guru Trades

Q1 2016

ATW Guru Trades in Q1 2016

Steven Cohen 1,037,700 sh (New)
Joel Greenblatt 762,574 sh (New)
Chuck Royce 135,909 sh (New)
Jeremy Grantham 39,000 sh (New)
Paul Tudor Jones 81,000 sh (+48.35%)
David Dreman 276,976 sh (+6.30%)
Prem Watsa Sold Out
Jim Simons Sold Out
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss Sold Out
Arnold Van Den Berg 854,388 sh (-2.83%)
» More
Q2 2016

ATW Guru Trades in Q2 2016

Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 43,672 sh (New)
Joel Greenblatt 1,182,230 sh (+55.03%)
Arnold Van Den Berg 1,224,528 sh (+43.32%)
Chuck Royce 135,909 sh (unchged)
Jeremy Grantham 39,000 sh (unchged)
David Dreman Sold Out
Steven Cohen Sold Out
Paul Tudor Jones 16,700 sh (-79.38%)
» More
Q3 2016

ATW Guru Trades in Q3 2016

Paul Tudor Jones 33,400 sh (+100.00%)
Jeremy Grantham 64,166 sh (+64.53%)
Arnold Van Den Berg 1,858,920 sh (+51.81%)
Chuck Royce 135,909 sh (unchged)
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss 42,726 sh (-2.17%)
Joel Greenblatt 656,675 sh (-44.45%)
» More
Q4 2016

ATW Guru Trades in Q4 2016

Chuck Royce 248,050 sh (+82.51%)
Jeremy Grantham 112,581 sh (+75.45%)
Arnold Van Den Berg 2,108,799 sh (+13.44%)
Joel Greenblatt 703,121 sh (+7.07%)
Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss Sold Out
Paul Tudor Jones Sold Out
» More
» Details

Insider Trades

Latest Guru Trades with ATW

(List those with share number changes of more than 20%, or impact to portfolio more than 0.1%)

No Entry found in the selected group of Gurus. You can
  • 1. Modify your Personalized List of Gurus, or
  • 2. Click on Premium Premium Tools above to check out all the Gurus, or
  • 3. Click on Premium Plus Premium Plus above for the stocks picks of all the institutional investment advisors (>4000)
» Interactive Charts

Peter Lynch Chart ( What is Peter Lynch Charts )

Business Description

Industry: Oil & Gas - Drilling » Oil & Gas Drilling    NAICS: 213111    SIC: 1381
Compare:OTCPK:ESVIF, NYSE:SDRL, OTCPK:TDGCF, NYSE:SBR, OTCPK:GFKSY, NYSE:PES, NYSE:UNT, OTCPK:PHXHF, OTCPK:SVGYF, OTCPK:FOEAY, OTCPK:AWLCF, NAS:ORIG, NYSE:PACD, OTCPK:CESDF, OTCPK:CETEF, AMEX:CEI, OTCPK:PKPL, OTCPK:MKSEF, OTCPK:SOIGF, OTCPK:AEGG » details
Traded in other countries:AWZ.Germany, ATW.Mexico,
Atwood Oceanics Inc is an offshore drilling contractor, engaged in drilling and completion of exploratory and developmental oil and gas wells.

Atwood Oceanics Inc was organized in 1968 as a Texas corporation and commenced operations in 1970. It is headquartered in Houston, Texas with support offices in Australia, Malaysia, Singapore and the United Kingdom. The Company is an offshore drilling contractor, engaged in drilling and completion of exploratory and developmental oil and gas wells. It owns 13 mobile offshore drilling units located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, the Mediterranean Sea, offshore West Africa, offshore Southeast Asia and offshore Australia, is constructing three ultra-deepwater drillships. Its various types of drilling rigs are Ultra-Deep-water Drill-ships, Semisubmersible Rigs, Semisubmersible Tender Assist Rigs and Jack-up Drilling Rigs. The Ultra-Deepwater Drillships are self-propelled vessels, shaped like conventional ships, and are mobile of the rig types. Semisubmersible rigs have two hulls, the lower of which is capable of being flooded. Semisubmersible tender assist rigs operate similar to semisubmersible rigs except that their drilling equipment is temporarily installed on permanently constructed offshore support platforms. A jack-up drilling rig consists of a single hull supported by at least three legs positioned on the sea floor. It is typically towed to the well site and once on location, its legs are lowered to the sea floor and the unit is raised out of the water by jacking the hull up the legs. It competes with several international offshore drilling contractors. Its competitors include Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc., Ensco plc, Noble Corporation, Rowan Companies plc, Seadrill Limited, and Transocean Ltd. It complies with government regulation in the form of international conventions, federal, state and local laws and regulations in jurisdictions where its vessels operate and are registered. The Company is subject to changing tax laws, treaties and regulations in and between countries in which it operates.

Guru Investment Theses on Atwood Oceanics Inc

Bruce Berkowitz Comments on Atwood Oceanics - Jan 31, 2017

Stressed energy markets led us to invest in senior bonds of offshore driller Atwood Oceanics (NYSE:ATW). The bonds were purchased at attractive prices relative to the backlog of future cash flow from drilling operations and the value of Atwood’s modernized fleet. Thus far, Atwood has weathered tough conditions as the industry slowly rebalances between rig supply and demand in a lower commodity price environment. Atwood’s management has reduced cash operating costs by 25% while extending contracts with customers and suppliers. Atwood also reduced the outstanding senior bond class by over 30% through debt repurchases and raised liquidity through an equity offering. All actions combine to give us comfort that Atwood is positioned to capitalize on the eventual upcycle.



From Bruce Berkowitz (Trades, Portfolio)'s Fairholme Fund (Trades, Portfolio) annual shareholder letter 2016.

Check out Bruce Berkowitz latest stock trades

Bruce Berkowitz Comments on Atwood - Aug 02, 2016

The Funds own senior bonds of Atwood (NYSE:ATW) due 2020 with a 17% yield to maturity. Year-to-date, Atwood has retired over 30% these bonds due 2020 via open market purchases and a $150 million cash tender offer announced in late June. These events indicate that management believes it has the financial wherewithal to meet all obligations and take advantage of market mispricing. An existing $220 million cash balance, available credit line, and current contractual backlog provide ample liquidity. Atwood’s fleet of 11 high-spec rigs has a superb operating record and management continues to blend and extend transaction dates with both customers and suppliers.




From Bruce Berkowitz (Trades, Portfolio)'s first-half 2016 letter to shareholders.

Check out Bruce Berkowitz latest stock trades

FPA Capital Fund Comments on Atwood - Dec 09, 2015

During the third quarter, we sold our investment in Atwood (NYSE:ATW) and reinvested the proceeds in PTEN. There are many things to like about Atwood, including their young fleet of high-spec rigs, their significant revenue backlog, their industry leading margins and revenue efficiency, their track record of safe operations, and their seasoned board of directors. The problem with Atwood is they have debt maturing in the next three years. While we imagine the cycle may have turned by then, we always look for a margin of safety and have chosen to reinvest this capital into other energy names with more favorable balance sheets is beyond reproach. Unlike land drilling, if a rig runs out of work it costs a lot of money to store (particularly floating rigs). We do not know if the cycle will last beyond the time when the bulk of Atwood’s revenue backlog runs out. The recent credit facility amendment greatly reduced Atwood’s flexibility and puts shareholders in a position where if they guess wrong about when the cycle turns they may lose their entire investment. We were not willing to underwrite that.

By selling the shares of Atwood and reinvesting in Patterson we do give up some revenue backlog, but we pick up another well run dividend paying company at a discount to tangible book value with a much better balance sheet and greater liquidity. Crucially, it costs very little money to store Patterson’s land drilling rigs or pressure pumping equipment in a yard if either are idled. We have confidence that by selling Atwood and investing in Patterson we have reduced our downside risk. Recall that we executed a similar swap in the first quarter of this year, when we replaced our Ensco holding with Helmerich & Payne for the very same reasons: similar upside but significantly greater downside protection.

From FPA Capital Fund (Trades, Portfolio)'s third quarter 2015 letter to shareholders.

Check out FPA Capital Fund latest stock trades

Top Ranked Articles about Atwood Oceanics Inc

Bruce Berkowitz Comments on Atwood Oceanics Guru stock highlight
Stressed energy markets led us to invest in senior bonds of offshore driller Atwood Oceanics (NYSE:ATW). The bonds were purchased at attractive prices relative to the backlog of future cash flow from drilling operations and the value of Atwood’s modernized fleet. Thus far, Atwood has weathered tough conditions as the industry slowly rebalances between rig supply and demand in a lower commodity price environment. Atwood’s management has reduced cash operating costs by 25% while extending contracts with customers and suppliers. Atwood also reduced the outstanding senior bond class by over 30% through debt repurchases and raised liquidity through an equity offering. All actions combine to give us comfort that Atwood is positioned to capitalize on the eventual upcycle. Read more...
Atwood: Offshore Oil Company Value With Upside Potential Atwood is a value at its current $9 per share, with the opportunity to double in the next 12 months
Atwood Industries is an offshore oil rig company. It owns 11 offshore drilling units in the U.S., Mediterranean Sea, offshore West Africa, Southeast Asia and Australia. In addition to the 11 rigs in fleet, it has two more ultra-deepwater rigs under construction in South Korea, scheduled for completion on September 2017 and June 2018. Ultra-deepwater rigs generate the most revenue for Atwood (52%) while making up 47% of drilling costs. Read more...
Bruce Berkowitz Comments on Atwood Guru stock highlight
The Funds own senior bonds of Atwood (NYSE:ATW) due 2020 with a 17% yield to maturity. Year-to-date, Atwood has retired over 30% these bonds due 2020 via open market purchases and a $150 million cash tender offer announced in late June. These events indicate that management believes it has the financial wherewithal to meet all obligations and take advantage of market mispricing. An existing $220 million cash balance, available credit line, and current contractual backlog provide ample liquidity. Atwood’s fleet of 11 high-spec rigs has a superb operating record and management continues to blend and extend transaction dates with both customers and suppliers.
Read more...

Ratios

vs
industry
vs
history
PE Ratio 2.95
ATW's PE Ratio is ranked higher than
75% of the 20 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 8.20 vs. ATW: 2.95 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PE Ratio only.
ATW' s PE Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.86  Med: 9.74 Max: 41.98
Current: 2.95
0.86
41.98
PE Ratio without NRI 2.95
ATW's PE Ratio without NRI is ranked higher than
71% of the 21 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 6.52 vs. ATW: 2.95 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PE Ratio without NRI only.
ATW' s PE Ratio without NRI Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.86  Med: 9.74 Max: 41.74
Current: 2.95
0.86
41.74
PB Ratio 0.21
ATW's PB Ratio is ranked higher than
89% of the 61 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.62 vs. ATW: 0.21 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PB Ratio only.
ATW' s PB Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.12  Med: 1.61 Max: 5.07
Current: 0.21
0.12
5.07
PS Ratio 0.80
ATW's PS Ratio is ranked higher than
64% of the 61 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 1.12 vs. ATW: 0.80 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PS Ratio only.
ATW' s PS Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.27  Med: 3.6 Max: 8.48
Current: 0.8
0.27
8.48
Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow 2.71
ATW's Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow is ranked higher than
67% of the 36 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 9999.00 vs. ATW: 2.71 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow only.
ATW' s Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 1.09  Med: 26.07 Max: 451.18
Current: 2.71
1.09
451.18
Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow 1.43
ATW's Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow is ranked higher than
74% of the 46 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 3.71 vs. ATW: 1.43 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow only.
ATW' s Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.58  Med: 8.01 Max: 37.31
Current: 1.43
0.58
37.31
EV-to-EBIT 5.80
ATW's EV-to-EBIT is ranked higher than
59% of the 22 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 9999.00 vs. ATW: 5.80 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBIT only.
ATW' s EV-to-EBIT Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 3  Med: 9.9 Max: 34.8
Current: 5.8
3
34.8
EV-to-EBITDA 3.94
ATW's EV-to-EBITDA is ranked higher than
68% of the 34 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 6.95 vs. ATW: 3.94 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBITDA only.
ATW' s EV-to-EBITDA Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 2.4  Med: 8 Max: 20.5
Current: 3.94
2.4
20.5
PEG Ratio 0.25
ATW's PEG Ratio is ranked higher than
56% of the 9 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.25 vs. ATW: 0.25 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PEG Ratio only.
ATW' s PEG Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.05  Med: 0.43 Max: 3.21
Current: 0.25
0.05
3.21
Shiller PE Ratio 2.37
ATW's Shiller PE Ratio is ranked higher than
87% of the 16 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 7.83 vs. ATW: 2.37 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Shiller PE Ratio only.
ATW' s Shiller PE Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 1.32  Med: 18.58 Max: 68.83
Current: 2.37
1.32
68.83
Current Ratio 7.08
ATW's Current Ratio is ranked higher than
87% of the 62 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 1.70 vs. ATW: 7.08 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Current Ratio only.
ATW' s Current Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.61  Med: 2.95 Max: 7.96
Current: 7.08
0.61
7.96
Quick Ratio 5.06
ATW's Quick Ratio is ranked higher than
82% of the 62 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 1.41 vs. ATW: 5.06 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Quick Ratio only.
ATW' s Quick Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.49  Med: 2.36 Max: 5.74
Current: 5.06
0.49
5.74
Days Inventory 120.45
ATW's Days Inventory is ranked lower than
83% of the 46 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 37.23 vs. ATW: 120.45 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Days Inventory only.
ATW' s Days Inventory Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 47.68  Med: 77.38 Max: 120.45
Current: 120.45
47.68
120.45
Days Sales Outstanding 40.03
ATW's Days Sales Outstanding is ranked higher than
75% of the 52 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 54.14 vs. ATW: 40.03 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Days Sales Outstanding only.
ATW' s Days Sales Outstanding Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 40.03  Med: 72.41 Max: 94.08
Current: 40.03
40.03
94.08
Days Payable 23.92
ATW's Days Payable is ranked lower than
82% of the 39 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 46.85 vs. ATW: 23.92 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Days Payable only.
ATW' s Days Payable Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 22.7  Med: 49.79 Max: 184.52
Current: 23.92
22.7
184.52

Buy Back

vs
industry
vs
history
5-Year Yield-on-Cost % 0.74
ATW's 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % is ranked lower than
78% of the 85 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 7.78 vs. ATW: 0.74 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % only.
ATW' s 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.73  Med: 3.07 Max: 14.65
Current: 0.74
0.73
14.65
3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio -0.40
ATW's 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio is ranked higher than
67% of the 51 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -1.60 vs. ATW: -0.40 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio only.
ATW' s 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -4.5  Med: -0.5 Max: 0.4
Current: -0.4
-4.5
0.4

Valuation & Return

vs
industry
vs
history
Price-to-Tangible-Book 0.22
ATW's Price-to-Tangible-Book is ranked higher than
89% of the 57 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.69 vs. ATW: 0.22 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Tangible-Book only.
ATW' s Price-to-Tangible-Book Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.17  Med: 1.88 Max: 6.22
Current: 0.22
0.17
6.22
Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF 1.05
ATW's Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF is ranked lower than
64% of the 28 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.70 vs. ATW: 1.05 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF only.
ATW' s Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 1.01  Med: 5.07 Max: 71.4
Current: 1.05
1.01
71.4
Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-DCF (Earnings Based) 0.18
ATW's Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-DCF (Earnings Based) is ranked lower than
100% of the 1 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.00 vs. ATW: 0.18 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-DCF (Earnings Based) only.
N/A
Price-to-Median-PS-Value 0.22
ATW's Price-to-Median-PS-Value is ranked higher than
82% of the 55 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 0.85 vs. ATW: 0.22 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Median-PS-Value only.
ATW' s Price-to-Median-PS-Value Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.13  Med: 1.01 Max: 2.37
Current: 0.22
0.13
2.37
Price-to-Peter-Lynch-Fair-Value 0.24
ATW's Price-to-Peter-Lynch-Fair-Value is ranked lower than
67% of the 6 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 9999.00 vs. ATW: 0.24 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Peter-Lynch-Fair-Value only.
ATW' s Price-to-Peter-Lynch-Fair-Value Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.09  Med: 0.68 Max: 3.06
Current: 0.24
0.09
3.06
Price-to-Graham-Number 0.17
ATW's Price-to-Graham-Number is ranked higher than
87% of the 16 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: 9999.00 vs. ATW: 0.17 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Graham-Number only.
ATW' s Price-to-Graham-Number Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.11  Med: 1.13 Max: 3.67
Current: 0.17
0.11
3.67
Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % 17.23
ATW's Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % is ranked higher than
85% of the 62 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -6.40 vs. ATW: 17.23 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % only.
ATW' s Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 2.9  Med: 10.1 Max: 33.4
Current: 17.23
2.9
33.4
Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % -11.92
ATW's Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % is ranked lower than
67% of the 33 Companies
in the Global Oil & Gas Drilling industry.

( Industry Median: -3.65 vs. ATW: -11.92 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % only.
ATW' s Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -51.3  Med: 10.1 Max: 50
Current: -11.92
-51.3
50

More Statistics

Revenue (TTM) (Mil) $870.4
EPS (TTM) $ 3.63
Beta2.87
Short Percentage of Float60.88%
52-Week Range $6.12 - 15.37
Shares Outstanding (Mil)80.47

Analyst Estimate

Sep17 Sep18
Revenue (Mil $) 532 377
EPS ($) -0.62 -2.53
EPS without NRI ($) -0.62 -2.53
EPS Growth Rate
(Future 3Y To 5Y Estimate)
N/A
Dividends per Share ($)
» More Articles for ATW

Headlines

Articles On GuruFocus.com
7 Undervalued Stocks With Growing EPS Feb 23 2017 
Atwood Oceanics: Positioned for Upside on Industry Recovery Feb 07 2017 
Bruce Berkowitz Comments on Atwood Oceanics Jan 31 2017 
Wait to Buy Atwood Oceanics Jan 10 2017 
22 Questions With Value Investor Jon Forbes Dec 27 2016 
Offshore Drillers Are Cheap for a Reason Nov 25 2016 
Prudential and Kelly Services Shine on This Measure Nov 09 2016 
Arnold Van Den Berg Makes One Buy and Three Large Increases in 3rd Quarter Oct 17 2016 
Atwood: Offshore Oil Company Value With Upside Potential Oct 17 2016 
Offshore Drillers: Beware the Value Trap Sep 12 2016 

More From Other Websites
Atwood Oceanics, Inc.: Fading performance but may be making a comeback? Feb 24 2017
A Look at Transocean’s Recent Contracts Feb 20 2017
Post Earnings Coverage as Atwood Oceanics Surpassed Top- and Bottom-line Expectations Feb 17 2017
ATWOOD OCEANICS INC Files SEC form 8-K, Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders Feb 16 2017
Gauging Atwood Oceanics’ Financial Health after Fiscal 1Q17 Feb 14 2017
Atwood Oceanics’ Record-Low Revenue in 1Q17: What Happened? Feb 14 2017
The Steep Revenue Fall in Store for Atwood Oceanics Feb 13 2017
Understanding Atwood Oceanics’ Cost-Reduction Plans Feb 13 2017
How the New Deal with Shipyard Is Affecting Atwood Oceanics’ Capex Feb 13 2017
ATWOOD OCEANICS TO ATTEND THE CREDIT SUISSE 22ND ANNUAL ENERGY SUMMIT Feb 10 2017
These Analysts Changed Their Target Prices for Atwood Oceanics’ after 1Q17 Feb 10 2017
Atwood Oceanics Has a Cautious Outlook for 2017 Feb 10 2017
ATWOOD OCEANICS INC Financials Feb 10 2017
Inside Atwood Oceanics’ 1Q17 Results Feb 10 2017
Atwood Oceanics: Positioned for Upside on Industry Recovery Feb 07 2017
Atwood Oceanics: Hoping for a 'Belichick' Comeback Feb 07 2017

Personalized Checklist

Checklist has been moved to "Checklist" tab.

Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names | Earn affiliate commissions by embedding GuruFocus Charts
GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)