Switch to:

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 0.15
MMV's Cash-to-Debt is ranked lower than
90% of the 1516 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 9999.00 vs. MMV: 0.15 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Cash-to-Debt only.
MMV' s Cash-to-Debt Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.02  Med: 0.06 Max: 0.69
Current: 0.15
0.02
0.69
Equity-to-Asset 0.64
MMV's Equity-to-Asset is ranked lower than
68% of the 1407 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 0.84 vs. MMV: 0.64 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Equity-to-Asset only.
MMV' s Equity-to-Asset Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.6  Med: 0.62 Max: 0.65
Current: 0.64
0.6
0.65
Interest Coverage 5.72
MMV's Interest Coverage is ranked lower than
83% of the 1341 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 1018.62 vs. MMV: 5.72 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Interest Coverage only.
MMV' s Interest Coverage Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 5.72  Med: 66.52 Max: 97.25
Current: 5.72
5.72
97.25
WACC vs ROIC
2.88%
3.67%
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 : 4/10

vs
industry
vs
history
Operating Margin % 68.62
MMV's Operating Margin % is ranked higher than
60% of the 1424 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 49.57 vs. MMV: 68.62 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Operating Margin % only.
MMV' s Operating Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 68.62  Med: 74.66 Max: 78.16
Current: 68.62
68.62
78.16
Net Margin % -31.68
MMV's Net Margin % is ranked lower than
87% of the 1426 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 41.12 vs. MMV: -31.68 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Net Margin % only.
MMV' s Net Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -166.76  Med: 95.71 Max: 294.83
Current: -31.68
-166.76
294.83
ROE % -0.01
MMV's ROE % is ranked lower than
72% of the 1518 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 5.44 vs. MMV: -0.01 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROE % only.
MMV' s ROE % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -11.28  Med: 7.88 Max: 20.09
Current: -0.01
-11.28
20.09
ROA % -1.13
MMV's ROA % is ranked lower than
76% of the 1548 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 2.89 vs. MMV: -1.13 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROA % only.
MMV' s ROA % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -7.02  Med: 4.75 Max: 12.58
Current: -1.13
-7.02
12.58
3-Year Revenue Growth Rate -6.00
MMV's 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate is ranked lower than
65% of the 1012 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 1.10 vs. MMV: -6.00 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate only.
MMV' s 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -6  Med: -5.2 Max: -2.5
Current: -6
-6
-2.5
3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate -7.90
MMV's 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate is ranked lower than
66% of the 849 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 2.30 vs. MMV: -7.90 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate only.
MMV' s 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -7.9  Med: -6.55 Max: -2.6
Current: -7.9
-7.9
-2.6
3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate -91.60
MMV's 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate is ranked lower than
98% of the 766 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 3.80 vs. MMV: -91.60 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate only.
MMV' s 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -91.6  Med: -38.8 Max: 24.6
Current: -91.6
-91.6
24.6
GuruFocus has detected 2 Warning Signs with Eaton Vance MA Muni Income Trust $MMV.
More than 500,000 people have already joined GuruFocus to track the stocks they follow and exchange investment ideas.
» MMV's 30-Y Financials

Financials


Revenue & Net Income
Equity & Asset
Operating Cash Flow & Free Cash Flow
Operating Cash Flow & Net Income

» Details

Insider Trades

Latest Guru Trades with MMV

(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: Asset Management » Asset Management    NAICS: 523920    SIC: 6799
Compare:NYSE:NOM, OTCPK:GNDIF, NYSE:EQS, AMEX:EIP, NYSE:NYV, AMEX:EVO, AMEX:BLJ, OTCPK:PMMTF, AMEX:EMJ, AMEX:EIO, OTCPK:NNDIF, AMEX:MHE, AMEX:CCA, AMEX:EVP, AMEX:NYH, NAS:ZAIS, NAS:OHAI, AMEX:BZM, AMEX:EIA, NYSE:MTR » details
Headquarter Location:USA
Eaton Vance MA Muni Income Trust is a non-diversified closed-end investment company. The Company's investment objective is to provide current income exempt from regular federal income tax and taxes in its specified state.

Eaton Vance MA Muni Income Trust. is a diversified closed-end investment company.

Top Ranked Articles about Eaton Vance MA Muni Income Trust

Mineral Mountain Continues to Expand Its Land Position in the Rochford Gold District, Black Hills, South Dakota

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwired - Jun 22, 2016) - Mineral Mountain Resources Ltd. ("Mineral Mountain" or the "Company") (TSX VENTURE:MMV) is pleased to announce that the Company has increased its 100%-owned land position in the Rochford Gold District to 5,447 acres (2179 hectares) by staking an additional 37 unpatented lode mineral claims totaling 606 acres (242 hectares). In all, the Company now owns a contiguous land position located in Lawrence and Pennington Counties totaling 345 unpatented lode mineral claims. The northern boundary of the Company's land holdings is located 18 km (11 mi.) south of the Homestake Mine deposit. The close similarities between the Homestake Mine and the Rochford District in host rock composition, structural style, metamorphic grade, and gold mineralization suggest that the Rochford District has the potential to contain a large gold resource. The property covers four high priority gold targets that are situated within two structural corridors that host Homestake Ledge-type gold mineralization associated with banded iron formation documented by Noranda, Newmont, Western Mining and Homestake between 1982 and 1996. All four priority targets, if traced systematically down the limb fold plunge by diamond drilling are considered to be above average for the discovery of Ledge-type gold deposits. The four gold targets, three along the 5.5 km long Standby-South Standby-Lookout Mine Trend and the fourth along the 1 km long Cochrane Trend, require a well-planned drill program initially totaling 9,000 meters of drilling. (see release dated March 7, 2016) The Rochford Gold District Despite the similarities to Homestake, and compelling evidence for gold mineralization, the Rochford District has remained under explored. The Rochford Gold District is located approximately 26 kilometers south of the world's largest banded iron formation hosted gold deposit, the Homestake Mine, which produced nearly 40,000,000 ounces of gold averaging about 10.89 g/t Au (0.350 opt) over the life of the mine from 1876 to 2001. The geology of the Rochford District is remarkably similar to that at the Homestake Mine with gold hosted in multiple deformed Proterozoic carbonate facies and local sulfide-facies iron formation that has typically been metamorphosed to cummingtonite/grunerite phyllites/schists and chlorite schists. There are numerous, relatively shallow past producing gold mines and prospects in the district that were developed in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Mineral Mountain's property package covers approximately a 9 km long segment of auriferous iron formation considered to have many geological and mineralogical aspects to the Homestake Mine 26 km to the northwest. The Rochford District covers more than 78 square kilometers and has been explored intermittently by several major companies like Getty, Newmont, Noranda, Western Mining and Homestake Mining in the 20th century. The last serious exploration for the Rochford District was completed in 1997. This district appears to have been forgotten and/or overlooked especially after the closing of the nearby giant Homestake Mine in 2001. We believe that because Homestake was so dominant in the Black Hills for over 125 years, many explorers erroneously assumed that the gold belt been thoroughly explored. A plan that shows locations of historic mines and prospects as well as important patented and unpatented claim locations has been posted on the Company's website www.mineralmtn.com. Qualified Persons The technical information in this news release has been prepared and approved by Nelson W. Baker, P.Eng., the President and CEO of Mineral Mountain Resources Ltd. and a Qualified Person for this project. All exploration activities at the Rochford Project are carried out under the supervision of Kevin Leonard, P.Geo., also a Qualified Person for this project and conducted by a highly technical team with several years exploring for iron hosted gold deposits in the Black hills and globally. About Mineral Mountain and the Rochford Project Mineral Mountain Resources Ltd., through its wholly owned subsidiary Mineral Mountain Resources (SD) Inc., is focused primarily on the systematic exploration and, if warranted, the development of its large, 100%-owned Rochford Project located 26 km south of the Homestake Mine along the highly prospective gold belt trending through the Black Hills of South Dakota, U.S.A. The Rochford Project hosts repeating limbs and/or ledges along two structural corridors that hosts commercial grade, iron hosted gold mineralization that require systematic diamond drilling. The project now totals 345 contiguous unpatented lode mineral claims covering approximately 5,447 acres. On Behalf of the Board of Directors MINERAL MOUNTAIN RESOURCES LTD. Nelson W. Baker, President and CEO Forward looking information This release contains "forward-looking information" within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation ("Forward-looking information"). Forward-looking information includes, but is not limited to, statements that address activities, events or developments that the Company expects or anticipates will or may occur in the future, including such things as future business strategy, competitive strengths, goals, expansion, growth of the Company's businesses, operations, plans and with respect to exploration results, the timing and success of exploration activities generally, permitting time lines, government regulation of exploration and mining operations, environmental risks, title disputes or claims, limitations on insurance coverage, timing and possible outcome of any pending litigation and timing and results of future resource estimates or future economic studies. Often, but not always, forward-looking information can be identified by the use of words such as "plans", "planning", "planned", "expects" or "looking forward", "does not expect", "continues", "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "potential", "anticipates", "does not anticipate" or "belief" or describes a "goal" or variation of such words and phrases or state that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken, occur or be achieved. Forward-looking information is based on a number of material factors and assumptions, including, the result of drilling and exploration activities, that contracted parties provide goods and/or services on the agreed timeframes, that equipment necessary for exploration is available as scheduled and does not incur unforeseen break downs, that no labour shortages or delays are incurred, that plant and equipment function as specified, that no unusual geological or technical problems occur, and that laboratory and other related services are available and perform as contracted. Forward-looking information involves known and unknown risks, future events, conditions, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, prediction, projection, forecast, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking information. Such factors include, among others, the interpretation and actual results of current exploration activities; changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined; future prices of gold; possible variations in grade or recovery rates; failure of equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; the failure of contracted parties to perform; labour disputes and other risks of the mining industry; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing or in the completion of exploration, as well as those factors disclosed in the company's publicly filed documents. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that forward-looking information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information.





Mineral Mountain Resources Ltd.
Brad Baker
Vice-President Corporate Development & Director
(778) 383-3975
[email protected]
www.mineralmtn.com




Read more...

Ratios

vs
industry
vs
history
PB Ratio 0.93
MMV's PB Ratio is ranked higher than
64% of the 1500 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 1.00 vs. MMV: 0.93 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PB Ratio only.
MMV' s PB Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.75  Med: 0.95 Max: 1.16
Current: 0.93
0.75
1.16
PS Ratio 16.11
MMV's PS Ratio is ranked lower than
75% of the 1199 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 6.49 vs. MMV: 16.11 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PS Ratio only.
MMV' s PS Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 10.34  Med: 13.66 Max: 16.91
Current: 16.11
10.34
16.91
Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow 30.21
MMV's Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow is ranked lower than
80% of the 362 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 15.43 vs. MMV: 30.21 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow only.
MMV' s Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 29.44  Med: 29.98 Max: 31.69
Current: 30.21
29.44
31.69
Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow 30.21
MMV's Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow is ranked lower than
69% of the 772 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 16.86 vs. MMV: 30.21 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow only.
MMV' s Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 29.44  Med: 29.98 Max: 31.69
Current: 30.21
29.44
31.69
EV-to-EBIT 24.54
MMV's EV-to-EBIT is ranked lower than
77% of the 1295 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 11.90 vs. MMV: 24.54 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBIT only.
MMV' s EV-to-EBIT Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 15.1  Med: 18.95 Max: 25.7
Current: 24.54
15.1
25.7
EV-to-EBITDA 24.00
MMV's EV-to-EBITDA is ranked lower than
78% of the 1333 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 11.65 vs. MMV: 24.00 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBITDA only.
MMV' s EV-to-EBITDA Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 15.1  Med: 18.95 Max: 25.1
Current: 24
15.1
25.1

Dividend & Buy Back

vs
industry
vs
history
Dividend Yield % 3.62
MMV's Dividend Yield % is ranked lower than
53% of the 1488 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 4.04 vs. MMV: 3.62 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Dividend Yield % only.
MMV' s Dividend Yield % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 3.46  Med: 5.74 Max: 7.98
Current: 3.62
3.46
7.98
3-Year Dividend Growth Rate -16.50
MMV's 3-Year Dividend Growth Rate is ranked lower than
82% of the 651 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 2.60 vs. MMV: -16.50 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Dividend Growth Rate only.
MMV' s 3-Year Dividend Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -16.5  Med: -6.65 Max: -4.8
Current: -16.5
-16.5
-4.8
Forward Dividend Yield % 3.90
MMV's Forward Dividend Yield % is ranked lower than
54% of the 1408 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 4.36 vs. MMV: 3.90 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Forward Dividend Yield % only.
N/A
5-Year Yield-on-Cost % 2.12
MMV's 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % is ranked lower than
78% of the 1743 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 6.87 vs. MMV: 2.12 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % only.
MMV' s 5-Year Yield-on-Cost % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 2.03  Med: 3.37 Max: 4.69
Current: 2.12
2.03
4.69
3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio 0.10
MMV's 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio is ranked higher than
65% of the 868 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: -1.30 vs. MMV: 0.10 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio only.
MMV' s 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -0.1  Med: 0.1 Max: 0.1
Current: 0.1
-0.1
0.1

Valuation & Return

vs
industry
vs
history
Price-to-Tangible-Book 0.93
MMV's Price-to-Tangible-Book is ranked higher than
66% of the 1434 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 1.01 vs. MMV: 0.93 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Tangible-Book only.
MMV' s Price-to-Tangible-Book Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.87  Med: 0.93 Max: 1.06
Current: 0.93
0.87
1.06
Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF 1.09
MMV's Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF is ranked lower than
51% of the 434 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 1.07 vs. MMV: 1.09 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF only.
MMV' s Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 1.08  Med: 1.12 Max: 1.16
Current: 1.09
1.08
1.16
Price-to-Median-PS-Value 1.18
MMV's Price-to-Median-PS-Value is ranked lower than
67% of the 819 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 1.01 vs. MMV: 1.18 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Median-PS-Value only.
MMV' s Price-to-Median-PS-Value Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.87  Med: 1 Max: 1.2
Current: 1.18
0.87
1.2
Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % 4.06
MMV's Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % is ranked lower than
55% of the 1804 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 5.13 vs. MMV: 4.06 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % only.
MMV' s Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 3.9  Med: 5.3 Max: 6.6
Current: 4.06
3.9
6.6
Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % -5.97
MMV's Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % is ranked lower than
75% of the 495 Companies
in the Global Asset Management industry.

( Industry Median: 5.09 vs. MMV: -5.97 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % only.
MMV' s Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -6  Med: -5.4 Max: -5.4
Current: -5.97
-6
-5.4

More Statistics

Revenue (TTM) (Mil) $2.28
Beta0.01
Short Percentage of Float0.00%
52-Week Range $13.05 - 15.82
Shares Outstanding (Mil)2.74

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)