StockData

Cryo-Cell International vs Charming Medical

CCEL and MCTA side by side, both in health services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.

How CCEL and MCTA compare

Cryo-Cell International grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−2.0% versus −22.7% for Charming Medical).

Charming Medical keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of −0.47% compared with −6.2% at Cryo-Cell International.

Charming Medical scores higher on the StockData Score (3 against 2 for Cryo-Cell International), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.

Key numbers

A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.

MetricCCELMCTA
Size and price
Market cap$39.1M–
Share price$4.85$29.35
Change, 1 year19.8%33.3%
Change, 5 years−60.4%–
Beta (5Y)0.260.85
Employees7229
StockData Score
Total score23 (better)
Valuation score00
Growth score1 (better)0
Performance score01 (better)
Health score12 (better)
Dividend score00
Valuation
P/S1.3×–
EV/EBITDA41.0×–
P/FCF8.4×–
FCF yield11.9%–
Growth
Revenue growth (TTM)−2.0% (better)−22.7%
Revenue growth, 5Y average0.27%–
Net income growth (TTM)–−102%
EPS growth (TTM)–−100%
Profitability
Gross margin78.5%99.3% (better)
Operating margin0.61% (better)−0.61%
Net margin−6.2%−0.47% (better)
FCF margin14.9% (better)−32.4%
Return on equity–−0.87%
Return on invested capital–−13.7%
Financial health
Debt / equity–0.04
Net debt / EBITDA3.65–
Interest coverage0.1× (better)−1.9×
Current ratio0.861.89 (better)
Altman Z-score−0.06–
Piotroski F-score5 (better)2
Dividends and buybacks
Dividend yield0.00%–
Shareholder yield0.00%–
Ownership
Held by institutions6.9%0.24%
Held by insiders41.7%71.9%
Short interest, % of float0.26%11.5%

Go deeper

For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.