Switch to:
Also traded in: Germany

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 : 4/10

vs
industry
vs
history
Cash-to-Debt 0.01
CSU's Cash-to-Debt is ranked lower than
93% of the 274 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 0.28 vs. CSU: 0.01 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Cash-to-Debt only.
CSU' s Cash-to-Debt Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.01  Med: 0.09 Max: 5.73
Current: 0.01
0.01
5.73
Equity-to-Asset 0.05
CSU's Equity-to-Asset is ranked lower than
91% of the 269 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 0.48 vs. CSU: 0.05 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Equity-to-Asset only.
CSU' s Equity-to-Asset Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.05  Med: 0.36 Max: 0.78
Current: 0.05
0.05
0.78
Debt-to-Equity 16.64
CSU's Debt-to-Equity is ranked lower than
98% of the 202 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 0.64 vs. CSU: 16.64 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Debt-to-Equity only.
CSU' s Debt-to-Equity Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.09  Med: 1.64 Max: 16.64
Current: 16.64
0.09
16.64
Debt-to-EBITDA 12.22
CSU's Debt-to-EBITDA is ranked lower than
96% of the 201 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 2.81 vs. CSU: 12.22 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Debt-to-EBITDA only.
CSU' s Debt-to-EBITDA Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 5.34  Med: 8.77 Max: 13.65
Current: 12.22
5.34
13.65
Interest Coverage 0.38
CSU's Interest Coverage is ranked lower than
99% of the 227 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 6.85 vs. CSU: 0.38 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Interest Coverage only.
CSU' s Interest Coverage Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.34  Med: 0.65 Max: 1.65
Current: 0.38
0.34
1.65
Piotroski F-Score: 4
Altman Z-Score: 0.42
Beneish M-Score: -2.43
WACC vs ROIC
6.07%
1.92%
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 : 7/10

vs
industry
vs
history
Operating Margin % 4.11
CSU's Operating Margin % is ranked lower than
75% of the 272 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 6.83 vs. CSU: 4.11 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Operating Margin % only.
CSU' s Operating Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 3.21  Med: 4.5 Max: 8.8
Current: 4.11
3.21
8.8
Net Margin % -7.29
CSU's Net Margin % is ranked lower than
86% of the 272 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 3.88 vs. CSU: -7.29 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Net Margin % only.
CSU' s Net Margin % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -9.46  Med: -2.24 Max: 2.01
Current: -7.29
-9.46
2.01
ROE % -45.61
CSU's ROE % is ranked lower than
93% of the 255 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 8.03 vs. CSU: -45.61 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROE % only.
CSU' s ROE % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -45.61  Med: -5.98 Max: 2.64
Current: -45.61
-45.61
2.64
ROA % -2.90
CSU's ROA % is ranked lower than
82% of the 273 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 3.48 vs. CSU: -2.90 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROA % only.
CSU' s ROA % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -3.79  Med: -1.03 Max: 1.11
Current: -2.9
-3.79
1.11
ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % 1.76
CSU's ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % is ranked lower than
78% of the 272 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 14.91 vs. CSU: 1.76 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % only.
CSU' s ROC (Joel Greenblatt) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.73  Med: 2.9 Max: 6.33
Current: 1.76
0.73
6.33
3-Year Revenue Growth Rate 5.30
CSU's 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate is ranked lower than
54% of the 211 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 6.50 vs. CSU: 5.30 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate only.
CSU' s 3-Year Revenue Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -1.5  Med: 9.25 Max: 22.6
Current: 5.3
-1.5
22.6
3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate 7.40
CSU's 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate is ranked higher than
56% of the 184 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 5.90 vs. CSU: 7.40 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate only.
CSU' s 3-Year EBITDA Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -10  Med: 6.7 Max: 17.9
Current: 7.4
-10
17.9
3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate -21.80
CSU's 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate is ranked lower than
86% of the 162 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 8.40 vs. CSU: -21.80 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate only.
CSU' s 3-Year EPS without NRI Growth Rate Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0  Med: 0 Max: 60.9
Current: -21.8
0
60.9
» CSU's 30-Y Financials

Financials (Next Earnings Date: 2019-02-27)


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

» Details

Guru Trades

CSU Guru Trades in

Q1 2018

CSU Guru Trades in Q1 2018

Jim Simons 16,300 sh (-75.53%)
» More
Q2 2018

CSU Guru Trades in Q2 2018

Jim Simons 141,000 sh (+765.03%)
» More
Q3 2018

CSU Guru Trades in Q3 2018

Jim Simons 312,500 sh (+121.63%)
» More
» Details

Insider Trades

Latest Guru Trades with NYSE:CSU

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

Guru Date Action
Impact Price Range
(Average)*
Change from Average Comment Current Shares
» Interactive Charts

Peter Lynch Chart ( What is Peter Lynch Charts )

Business Description

Industry: Health Care Providers » Long-Term Care Facilities    NAICS: 623312    SIC: 8051
Compare:ASX:JHC, NZSE:ARV, NZSE:OCA, ASX:GTY, TSE:6077, NYSE:GEN, OSTO:AMBEA, TSE:8769, NYSE:CIVI, TSE:2374, TSE:2398, TSX:EXE, TSE:6062, XPAR:LNA, TSE:2150, HKSE:01989, TSE:2373, NAS:FVE, NAS:DVCR, HKSE:08405 » details
Traded in other countries:13C.Germany,
Headquarter Location:USA
Capital Senior Living Corp provides senior living services to the elderly, including independent living, assisted living, skilled nursing and home care services.

Capital Senior Living Corp operates senior-living communities in the United States. The vast majority of its revenue comes from private payers. The company provides three forms of senior-living services: independent living, assisted living, and home-care services. Independent-living services are provided to seniors who do not need assistance with daily activities but prefer to be part of a residential community that offers healthcare and other services, like daily meals, transportation, housekeeping, and social activities. Capital's assisted-living facilities offer personal-care services, 24-hour staffing, and support services for daily activities. Some of these units are customized for residents with certain forms of dementia and include specialized forms of assistance.

Guru Investment Theses on Capital Senior Living Corp

Ruane Cunniff Comments on Constellation Software - Mar 06, 2018

Constellation Software (NYSE:CSU) delivered solid performance again in 2017. Revenue grew in the mid-teens with a low single-digit organic contribution and margins remained strong, leading to mid-teens growth in earnings. The company took an important step last year, expanding the M&A team under CIO Bernie Anzarouth to accelerate its rate of acquisitions. This investment appears to be bearing fruit. In the first nine months of 2017, the company deployed more on acquisitions than it did in the full year 2016. This pace is not enough to soak up all of the company’s cash flow, but it is a remarkable achievement against a tough backdrop. Asset prices are up, debt is inexpensive and Constellation’s success has attracted copycats.This is one of the most financially disciplined companies we have ever come across, so to see it find investments in this environment bodes well for when markets inevitably turn.

From Ruane Cunniff (Trades, Portfolio)'s Sequoia Fund 4th Quarter 2017 Manager's Commentary.

Check out Ruane Cunniff latest stock trades

Top Ranked Articles about Capital Senior Living Corp

Capital Senior Living Appoints Kimberly Lody as President and CEO
Capital Senior Living Corporation to Present at the Stephens NY Investment Conference on Wednesday, November 7, 2018
Capital Senior Living Corporation Announces Release Date for Third Quarter 2018 Financial Results
Capital Senior Living Announces Retirement of Larry Cohen as Vice Chairman and CEO
Investor Expectations to Drive Momentum within Capital Senior Living, Thermon Group, L.B. Foster, Anavex Life Sciences, Opiant Pharmaceuticals, and Huron Consulting Group — Discovering Underlying Factors of Influence
Senior Living Provider Introduces New Technology To Capture Resident Stories And Connect Families
Capital Senior Living Corporation Announces Release Date for Second Quarter 2018 Financial Results
Seniors Raise Funds And Awareness For Peers Affected By Alzheimer's Disease
Capital Senior Living Corporation to Present at the Jefferies 2018 Healthcare Conference on Tuesday, June 5, 2018
Recent Analysis Shows Capital Senior Living, Digital Realty Trust, Minerva Neurosciences, Zix, First Merchants, and PennantPark Investment Market Influences — Renewed Outlook, Key Drivers of Growth

Ratios

vs
industry
vs
history
Price-to-Owner-Earnings 488.66
CSU's Price-to-Owner-Earnings is ranked lower than
98% of the 109 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 26.64 vs. CSU: 488.66 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Owner-Earnings only.
CSU' s Price-to-Owner-Earnings Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 4.77  Med: 24.08 Max: 629.33
Current: 488.66
4.77
629.33
PB Ratio 3.85
CSU's PB Ratio is ranked lower than
77% of the 253 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 2.64 vs. CSU: 3.85 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PB Ratio only.
CSU' s PB Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.41  Med: 3.82 Max: 6.04
Current: 3.85
0.41
6.04
PS Ratio 0.47
CSU's PS Ratio is ranked higher than
76% of the 262 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 1.70 vs. CSU: 0.47 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful PS Ratio only.
CSU' s PS Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.33  Med: 1.01 Max: 2.25
Current: 0.47
0.33
2.25
Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow 17.54
CSU's Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow is ranked lower than
52% of the 135 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 23.01 vs. CSU: 17.54 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow only.
CSU' s Price-to-Free-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 8.14  Med: 24.75 Max: 517
Current: 17.54
8.14
517
Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow 5.43
CSU's Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow is ranked higher than
84% of the 186 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 14.67 vs. CSU: 5.43 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow only.
CSU' s Price-to-Operating-Cash-Flow Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 4.02  Med: 11.26 Max: 23
Current: 5.43
4.02
23
EV-to-EBIT 63.49
CSU's EV-to-EBIT is ranked lower than
98% of the 214 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 21.68 vs. CSU: 63.49 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBIT only.
CSU' s EV-to-EBIT Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -2606.5  Med: 56.1 Max: 5124.2
Current: 63.49
-2606.5
5124.2
EV-to-EBITDA 14.90
CSU's EV-to-EBITDA is ranked lower than
61% of the 228 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 15.23 vs. CSU: 14.90 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-EBITDA only.
CSU' s EV-to-EBITDA Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 6.5  Med: 15.6 Max: 26.4
Current: 14.9
6.5
26.4
EV-to-Revenue 2.63
CSU's EV-to-Revenue is ranked lower than
61% of the 271 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 2.17 vs. CSU: 2.63 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful EV-to-Revenue only.
CSU' s EV-to-Revenue Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 1.2  Med: 2.8 Max: 3.7
Current: 2.63
1.2
3.7
Current Ratio 0.62
CSU's Current Ratio is ranked lower than
79% of the 260 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 1.34 vs. CSU: 0.62 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Current Ratio only.
CSU' s Current Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.58  Med: 1.38 Max: 9.42
Current: 0.62
0.58
9.42
Quick Ratio 0.62
CSU's Quick Ratio is ranked lower than
75% of the 260 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 1.24 vs. CSU: 0.62 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Quick Ratio only.
CSU' s Quick Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.58  Med: 1.38 Max: 9.42
Current: 0.62
0.58
9.42
Days Sales Outstanding 9.58
CSU's Days Sales Outstanding is ranked higher than
91% of the 227 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 39.87 vs. CSU: 9.58 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Days Sales Outstanding only.
CSU' s Days Sales Outstanding Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 3.91  Med: 7.62 Max: 11.16
Current: 9.58
3.91
11.16
Days Payable 11.30
CSU's Days Payable is ranked lower than
86% of the 176 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 40.58 vs. CSU: 11.30 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Days Payable only.
CSU' s Days Payable Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 4.03  Med: 6 Max: 13.97
Current: 11.3
4.03
13.97

Buy Back

vs
industry
vs
history
3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio -1.60
CSU's 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio is ranked higher than
56% of the 159 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: -2.50 vs. CSU: -1.60 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio only.
CSU' s 3-Year Average Share Buyback Ratio Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: -10  Med: -1.2 Max: 0
Current: -1.6
-10
0

Valuation & Return

vs
industry
vs
history
Price-to-Tangible-Book 3.84
CSU's Price-to-Tangible-Book is ranked lower than
62% of the 200 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 3.33 vs. CSU: 3.84 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Tangible-Book only.
CSU' s Price-to-Tangible-Book Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.27  Med: 1.53 Max: 5.58
Current: 3.84
0.27
5.58
Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF 1.12
CSU's Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF is ranked higher than
68% of the 101 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 1.98 vs. CSU: 1.12 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF only.
CSU' s Price-to-Intrinsic-Value-Projected-FCF Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.48  Med: 1.51 Max: 2.46
Current: 1.12
0.48
2.46
Price-to-Median-PS-Value 0.47
CSU's Price-to-Median-PS-Value is ranked higher than
77% of the 208 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 1.03 vs. CSU: 0.47 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Price-to-Median-PS-Value only.
CSU' s Price-to-Median-PS-Value Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.33  Med: 1.07 Max: 6.93
Current: 0.47
0.33
6.93
Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % 1.57
CSU's Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % is ranked lower than
77% of the 273 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 3.61 vs. CSU: 1.57 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % only.
CSU' s Earnings Yield (Greenblatt) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 0.1  Med: 1.8 Max: 9.7
Current: 1.57
0.1
9.7
Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % 13.27
CSU's Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % is ranked higher than
57% of the 133 Companies
in the Global Long-Term Care Facilities industry.

( Industry Median: 9.10 vs. CSU: 13.27 )
Ranked among companies with meaningful Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % only.
CSU' s Forward Rate of Return (Yacktman) % Range Over the Past 10 Years
Min: 4.8  Med: 12.6 Max: 20.5
Current: 13.27
4.8
20.5

More Statistics

Revenue (TTM) (Mil) $461.89
EPS (TTM) $ -1.13
Beta1.07
Volatility33.46%
52-Week Range $6.23 - 13.41
Shares Outstanding (Mil)31.28

Piotroski F-Score Details

Piotroski F-Score: 44
Positive ROAN
Positive CFROAY
Higher ROA yoyY
CFROA > ROAY
Lower Leverage yoyY
Higher Current Ratio yoyN
Less Shares Outstanding yoyN
Higher Gross Margin yoyN
Higher Asset Turnover yoyN

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)

GF Chat

{{numOfNotice}}