ATS Corp /ATS (ATS) Stock Analysis
ATS Corp /ATS
▾ What's in the 32/100 risk score? (higher = riskier)
Contributions (weight × component score) sum to the total. This near-term score now includes fundamental health (leverage, FCF trend). See the Financial Health section for the full balance-sheet read.
How to read ATS (pre-profit growth)
This company is reinvesting instead of generating profit, so a standard DCF cannot price it. The useful question is whether the growth the market is paying for is achievable — and whether the company can fund itself until then.
-
1
Reverse-DCF — the growth the price demands ↓
It shows exactly how fast the business must grow to justify today's price. Compare that to what comparable companies have actually achieved.
-
2
Cash runway ↓
Can it reach profitability before it has to raise money and dilute shareholders?
-
3
Interactive calculator ↓
Set your own growth + margin assumptions and see what the business would be worth if you are right.
It files little or nothing with the SEC — so our cash-flow models, financial statements, and U.S. insider data (Form 4) don't apply. What's still real: the live U.S. price and short positioning. Here's what we could pull from other sources:
📑 Read the real filings: latest SEC 6-K ↗
Identity, share count and tier from FINRA + OTC Markets; not a substitute for the home-market financial statements. Thin U.S. disclosure + OTC trading is itself a risk factor.
How does ATS stack up against its closest peers?
We take the 8 same-industry companies most similar to ATS (similar size) and check what investors are paying for each dollar of their revenue (or profits). If ATS is much more expensive on the same yardstick, that's a red flag — unless you have a specific reason it deserves a premium. For a leveraged business, EV/EBIT and FCF yield (both in the table) are usually more reliable than EV/Sales, because revenue multiples ignore differences in margins and debt.
▾ What's "EV / Sales" in plain English?
EV (Enterprise Value) = market cap + total debt − cash. It's "what you'd pay to buy the entire company outright" — you pay the market cap to shareholders and take over their debt, but you keep their cash. EV is fairer than market cap alone because it includes the debt the new owner inherits.
EV / Sales = EV ÷ annual revenue. So "2.5×" means investors pay $2.50 of enterprise value per $1 of yearly sales. Higher = market is paying more per dollar of sales (usually because they expect future growth or fat margins).
p25 / median / p75 are the 25th, 50th (middle), and 75th percentile of the peers' multiples. Half the peers fall between p25 and p75. The median (p50) is the typical peer — that's the benchmark we compare to.
| EV / SalesEV / Sales — For every $1 of yearly revenue, this is how many dollars investors pay to own the whole business (including debt). Why it matters: Works for pre-profit growth companies where P/E and FCF don't apply. The most apples-to-apples cross-company multiple because it ignores accounting choices. Reference: 1–3x for mature companies · 4–10x for software/SaaS · 10–20x for hypergrowth · >20x is rare and demanding Full explanation → |
3.4x / 4.5x / 7.0x |
| EV / Gross ProfitEV / Gross Profit — Enterprise value divided by gross profit — the multiple paid for what each dollar of sales contributes after direct costs. Why it matters: More refined than EV/Sales for high-margin businesses (software, marketplaces) where gross margin is the real economic engine. Reference: 8–15x for SaaS · 15–25x for hypergrowth software · >30x demanding Full explanation → |
6.5x / 10.9x / 21.0x |
| EV / EBITEV / EBITDA — Enterprise value divided by earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization. Why it matters: A classic "what would a private buyer pay" multiple — used in M&A. Strips out tax and capital-structure noise. Reference: 8–12x for mature businesses · 15–25x for growth · Below 5x often signals distress Full explanation → |
16.6x / 24.0x / 27.3x |
Bold middle number = median peer. Half the peers trade above it, half below. Computed over 8 same-industry peers; implausible multiples excluded.
⚠️ Important caveat: peer multiples only work if the peers are genuinely comparable. Always check the peer list below — if the auto-picker grabbed micro-caps or unrelated businesses, the comparison is noise. A medical-device giant priced against tiny biotech startups won't produce a useful signal.
▾ View peer list (8)
| Ticker | Company | Industry | Mcap | EV/Sales | EV/GP | EV/EBIT | FCF Yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRC | GORMAN RUPP CO | Industrial Machinery | $2.0B | 3.4x | 10.9x | 24.0x | 4.3% |
| CECO | CECO ENVIRONMENTAL CORP | Industrial Machinery | $2.7B | 3.7x | 10.7x | 27.3x | 4.9% |
| OUST | Ouster, Inc. | Industrial Machinery | $2.9B | 17.3x | 35.1x | — | 0.7% |
| HSAI | Hesai Group | Industrial Machinery | $3.0B | 7.0x | 16.7x | 125.0x | 0.6% |
| EFXT | Enerflex Ltd. | Industrial Machinery | $3.0B | — | 5.2x | — | — |
| GHM | GRAHAM CORP | Industrial Machinery | $1.1B | 5.3x | 21.0x | 73.0x | 2.3% |
| SERV | Serve Robotics Inc. /DE/ | Industrial Machinery | $723M | 272.9x | — | — | — |
| ESAB | ESAB Corp | Industrial Machinery | $5.6B | 2.4x | 6.5x | 16.6x | 3.5% |
Quality & solvency checks
Cheap stocks can be cheap for a reason. These screens warn when a low valuation comes paired with structural fragility.
Why it matters: Cheap-looking stocks (low P/E or P/B) often have low Z-scores because the market knows the company is dying. Z-score warns you before you fall into a value trap.
Reference: > 3.0 = safe zone · 1.81–3.0 = grey zone · < 1.81 = distress zone
Full explanation →
The Z-score needs working capital, retained earnings, EBIT, sales and total assets from the latest balance sheet, and at least one of those isn't reported in machine-readable form here — common for foreign private issuers. We leave it blank rather than compute a distress verdict from an estimated input. It doesn't affect the reported figures in the financial tables below.
Why it matters: High score = fundamentals improving. Low score = deteriorating. Especially powerful for filtering cheap stocks: cheap + high F-score historically outperforms; cheap + low F-score is often a value trap.
Reference: 7–9 = strong · 4–6 = mediocre · 0–3 = weak
Full explanation →
The F-score compares two consecutive years of income, cash-flow and balance-sheet data. We have 0 years of income data for this filer, but no machine-readable cash-flow statement or balance sheet — so several of the nine checks have no input at all. We show nothing rather than score a partial year against itself. The reported figures in the financial tables below are unaffected.
A standard discounted cash flowDCF — Discounted Cash Flow — sums up all future cash a business will produce, adjusted for the fact that future dollars are worth less than dollars today.
Why it matters: It is the most fundamentally honest valuation method when applicable — but only works for companies with predictable, positive cash flow.
Reference: Best for: mature, profitable businesses. Fails for: pre-profit growth, banks, REITs.
Full explanation → (DCF) valuation is not meaningful for ATS because the model projects negative free cash flowFree Cash Flow (FCF) — Operating cash flow minus capital spending: cash left after a company covers operating costs, taxes and interest and reinvests in the business — but BEFORE repaying debt principal or paying dividends. The cash actually available to investors.
Why it matters: A company can show big profits on paper while burning through cash. FCF is what actually fills the bank account.
Reference: Healthy mature businesses convert 8–15% of revenue into FCF · Growth companies often negative
Full explanation → (FCF negative flag). This indicates the company is likely in a growth or re-investment phase where current cash flows are not sufficient to derive a positive intrinsic valueIntrinsic Value — Our DCF model's estimate of what each share is mathematically worth based on projected cash flows.
Why it matters: Compare to current price. Below IV = potentially undervalued. Above IV = priced for growth that must actually happen.
Reference: Model-derived; quality depends on data and assumptions.
Full explanation →. Investors are likely focused on future revenue growth and the potential for eventual profitability. The primary quantifiable risk is the company's low franchise/durability score of 0/5, suggesting a lack of strong competitive advantages.
As of 3 months ago
Anatomy of a share
What you're buying per share. Bars are at the same scale so you can see the relative size of revenue, costs, cash flow, and debt — not just read them in a table.
What you actually need to decide
Every stock price is a disagreement. Here's the single thing that must go right for the bulls, the single thing that breaks the thesis, and the concrete signposts to watch so you can update your view as real results arrive.
Why it matters: A company can show big profits on paper while burning through cash. FCF is what actually fills the bank account.
Reference: Healthy mature businesses convert 8–15% of revenue into FCF · Growth companies often negative
Full explanation →, indicating improved operational efficiency and profitability.
Why it matters: A company can show big profits on paper while burning through cash. FCF is what actually fills the bank account.
Reference: Healthy mature businesses convert 8–15% of revenue into FCF · Growth companies often negative
Full explanation → negative' flag and low 'franchise/durability score' imply that if the company continues to burn cash without developing stronger competitive advantages, it may struggle to achieve sustainable profitability.
- Quarterly revenue growth rates
- Improvements in operating margins
- Progress towards positive free cash flow
Management & Leadership
Andrew H. Deakin serves as the Chief Executive Officer of ATS Corporation, having been appointed to the role in 2017. He has been instrumental in guiding the company's strategic direction and operational execution. Joseph E. Morath is the Chief Financial Officer.
What They Make
ATS Corporation is a global automation solutions provider, designing and building custom automation equipment, integrated manufacturing solutions, and related services for a diverse customer base across various industries.
End Markets
Revenue Drivers
Why Is It Priced Like This?
Why Customers Pay
The income statement and balance sheet are also too incomplete here to substitute another lens honestly, so this page carries price, momentum and disclosure facts only.
The market is likely pricing ATS based on expectations of future revenue growth (modeled at 15.0%) and the potential for improved margins as the company scales its automation solutions. The 'FCF negative' flag indicates that current operations do not generate sufficient free cash flowFree Cash Flow (FCF) — Operating cash flow minus capital spending: cash left after a company covers operating costs, taxes and interest and reinvests in the business — but BEFORE repaying debt principal or paying dividends. The cash actually available to investors.
Why it matters: A company can show big profits on paper while burning through cash. FCF is what actually fills the bank account.
Reference: Healthy mature businesses convert 8–15% of revenue into FCF · Growth companies often negative
Full explanation →, suggesting investors are betting on the company's ability to achieve profitability and positive cash flow in the future. The market may be assigning value to the company's ability to capitalize on the increasing demand for industrial automation across various sectors, which is not in the model.
Business Model & Valuation
How They Make Money
Growth / Revenue DCF
No cash flow statement data available - using revenue/margin growth model as fallback.
Show advanced inputs
| Revenue Growth | 15.0% |
What this model does NOT do: this is a consolidated owner-earnings FCF model. Standalone segment assumptions: none. It does not project its revenue segments independently; their combined effect is embedded in the historical revenue and cash-flow trend the model extrapolates. The calculator above can only approximate a segment's impact through the single consolidated growth rate — it cannot model any one line separately. For a true segment-level view, build a separate model from the company's segment disclosures.
Maturity & Competitive Position
Moat Signals
The model projects future revenue growth at 15.0%.
Geography & Markets
ATS Corporation operates globally, serving customers across North America, Europe, and Asia. Exact geographic revenue mix percentages are not available from current data sources.
Geographic Risks
Market Signals
These are timing signals, not value signals — they describe the stock's recent price behavior, not what the business is worth. Use them for the "the thesis looks good, but is now the moment?" question. Each tile below explains what it's saying.
Why it matters: Short-term contrarian indicator. Extreme readings often precede mean reversion, though not always.
Reference: 30–70 normal · >70 overbought · <30 oversold
Full explanation → (14)43.0NeutralMomentum is balanced — neither overbought nor oversold.
Why it matters: When the fast line crosses above the slow line, short-term momentum is turning up; below, turning down. A timing cue, not a value signal.
Reference: Line above signal = bullish momentum · below = bearish
Full explanation →BearishLine below signalThe fast trend is below the slow trend — short-term momentum is currently downward.
Technicals describe price, not the business. A great company can have a "bearish" tape (a buying chance) and a weak one a "bullish" tape (a trap). Pair these with the valuation and health sections above.
QUALITY
Data Quality & Risk Flags (3 notes — click to expand/collapse)
Guardrail Notes (3)
- FCF negative: revenue/margin growth model projects future cash flows from revenue trajectory.
- INVARIANT: weighted IV is non-positive. Model may not be appropriate.
- Model implies no positive equity value under these assumptions. Valuation is speculative/low-confidence.
FINANCIALS
Financial Statements (5-year tables — click to expand)
From ATS Corp /ATS's SEC filings (EDGAR).
Similar companies worth a look
Same sector and industry, similar fundamentals shape. Verify everything yourself — this list is computed mechanically and does not reflect our judgment about whether any of these are a good investment.