Stock Analysis

International Game Technology (NYSE:IGT) Takes On Some Risk With Its Use Of Debt

NYSE:IGT
Source: Shutterstock

The external fund manager backed by Berkshire Hathaway's Charlie Munger, Li Lu, makes no bones about it when he says 'The biggest investment risk is not the volatility of prices, but whether you will suffer a permanent loss of capital.' So it seems the smart money knows that debt - which is usually involved in bankruptcies - is a very important factor, when you assess how risky a company is. As with many other companies International Game Technology PLC (NYSE:IGT) makes use of debt. But the real question is whether this debt is making the company risky.

When Is Debt A Problem?

Debt and other liabilities become risky for a business when it cannot easily fulfill those obligations, either with free cash flow or by raising capital at an attractive price. If things get really bad, the lenders can take control of the business. However, a more usual (but still expensive) situation is where a company must dilute shareholders at a cheap share price simply to get debt under control. Of course, the upside of debt is that it often represents cheap capital, especially when it replaces dilution in a company with the ability to reinvest at high rates of return. When we think about a company's use of debt, we first look at cash and debt together.

Check out our latest analysis for International Game Technology

What Is International Game Technology's Debt?

You can click the graphic below for the historical numbers, but it shows that International Game Technology had US$5.75b of debt in December 2022, down from US$6.53b, one year before. On the flip side, it has US$590.0m in cash leading to net debt of about US$5.16b.

debt-equity-history-analysis
NYSE:IGT Debt to Equity History May 3rd 2023

A Look At International Game Technology's Liabilities

We can see from the most recent balance sheet that International Game Technology had liabilities of US$1.85b falling due within a year, and liabilities of US$6.61b due beyond that. Offsetting these obligations, it had cash of US$590.0m as well as receivables valued at US$1.04b due within 12 months. So its liabilities total US$6.83b more than the combination of its cash and short-term receivables.

Given this deficit is actually higher than the company's market capitalization of US$5.54b, we think shareholders really should watch International Game Technology's debt levels, like a parent watching their child ride a bike for the first time. In the scenario where the company had to clean up its balance sheet quickly, it seems likely shareholders would suffer extensive dilution.

We measure a company's debt load relative to its earnings power by looking at its net debt divided by its earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) and by calculating how easily its earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) cover its interest expense (interest cover). The advantage of this approach is that we take into account both the absolute quantum of debt (with net debt to EBITDA) and the actual interest expenses associated with that debt (with its interest cover ratio).

International Game Technology's debt is 3.7 times its EBITDA, and its EBIT cover its interest expense 3.2 times over. Taken together this implies that, while we wouldn't want to see debt levels rise, we think it can handle its current leverage. Given the debt load, it's hardly ideal that International Game Technology's EBIT was pretty flat over the last twelve months. The balance sheet is clearly the area to focus on when you are analysing debt. But ultimately the future profitability of the business will decide if International Game Technology can strengthen its balance sheet over time. So if you want to see what the professionals think, you might find this free report on analyst profit forecasts to be interesting.

But our final consideration is also important, because a company cannot pay debt with paper profits; it needs cold hard cash. So we always check how much of that EBIT is translated into free cash flow. During the last three years, International Game Technology generated free cash flow amounting to a very robust 93% of its EBIT, more than we'd expect. That puts it in a very strong position to pay down debt.

Our View

International Game Technology's level of total liabilities and interest cover definitely weigh on it, in our esteem. But the good news is it seems to be able to convert EBIT to free cash flow with ease. When we consider all the factors discussed, it seems to us that International Game Technology is taking some risks with its use of debt. So while that leverage does boost returns on equity, we wouldn't really want to see it increase from here. When analysing debt levels, the balance sheet is the obvious place to start. However, not all investment risk resides within the balance sheet - far from it. Be aware that International Game Technology is showing 2 warning signs in our investment analysis , and 1 of those is a bit concerning...

If, after all that, you're more interested in a fast growing company with a rock-solid balance sheet, then check out our list of net cash growth stocks without delay.

New: AI Stock Screener & Alerts

Our new AI Stock Screener scans the market every day to uncover opportunities.

• Dividend Powerhouses (3%+ Yield)
• Undervalued Small Caps with Insider Buying
• High growth Tech and AI Companies

Or build your own from over 50 metrics.

Explore Now for Free

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.