There's no way to sugarcoat the most recent financial performance here in my view.

There very much are viable alternatives to stocks, and so a given stock must be very compelling to get me excited. Given that an investor can earn a risk free 4.7% return, why would they choose to embrace higher risk, and lower return? As I've reminded people incessantly recently-is there any other way to remind people, other than by being incessant?-we're no longer in the TINA world. In the relativistic world of investing, we're always looking for the alternative that generates the lowest risk and highest potential returns. If growing sales doesn't lead to growing profits, what's the point. In my view, this suggests that the extra revenue is, in some significant ways, irrelevant. Although long term debt is lower, it's worth noting that this business is less profitable now than it was in 2019. The shares are even more expensive, in spite of the fact that the business has deteriorated significantly in my view. Robinson at current prices, and I would recommend other people avoid the name. For that reason, I want to give you the gist of my thinking in a single paragraph, so you'll have more time to do whatever fun thing you've got lined up for the weekend. The weekend is upon us, dear readers, and for that reason I can hope and assume that you have other things on your minds than my take on C.H. Even if the business has deteriorated, this may be an excellent investment if we can snag shares at a sufficiently cheap price. I'll review those financial results, and put them in the context of the current valuation.

After all, a stock trading at $99 is a slightly better investment than the same stock when it's trading at $101. Since the company has reported earnings yet again, I thought I'd check back in on the company to see if it makes sense to buy at current prices. I like underperformance, because it means that a stock may have moved from being too expensive, to reasonably priced. ( NASDAQ: CHRW), and in that time the shares have returned a negative 1.1% return against a gain of about 3.5% for the S&P 500. It's been just under three months since I put out my latest cautionary note on C.H.

Time and chance penman