











The Oracle of Omaha Warren Buffett is generally viewed as the most respected and successful investor in history, and many of our value-oriented readers follow the movements and purchases of Buffett rather closely and for good reason. Berkshire Hathaway, a conglomerate holding company, which Buffett built from a textile company into a major corporation, has averaged a 20.3% compounded annual gain in per-share book value from 1965-2008. There is no doubt about the success Buffett has achieved over the years, and there has even been a recent study done that shows an investor could have earned over 14% returns a year had they purchased each Buffett stock, a month after his investment company disclosed ownership.
We thought it would be an interesting story to show how Buffett’s holdings would rank according to The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) valuation model and Economic Margin Methodology. The companies we believe look the most attractive and that investors should pay the most attention to when searching for long investment opportunities are the companies that have both an attractive default AFG valuation and are expected to improve their Economic Margins at a greater rate than their sector peers.
AFG's track record of identifying winners and losers has proven that companies AFG identifies as undervalued are more likely to outperform, than those AFG ranks as overvalued, and the same holds true for companies with expected improvements in EMs vs. expected declines. The Economic Margin methodology adjusts for common distortions in GAAP accounting practices and helps investors to understand the true economic profitability a company earns above its cost of capital. By understanding the true economic profitability a company earns and by gaining a firm grasp on the expectations embedded in security prices, investors can come to a more refined intrinsic value for a company and thus put themselves in a better position to outperform.
Below is a list of Berkshire Hathaway’s current holdings (excluding Financials) ranked by valuation attractiveness, and followed by expected change in economic margins.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other Popular Articles:
To stay updated on how other professional investor's currently view the market join our Market Forecast Project survey and be among the first to receive the results.






Every year Fortune releases a list of the 40 best companies to invest in now to retire on. This long-term portfolio is designed to protect your hard-earned nest-egg as you approach retirement.
Last year Fortune’s portfolio of 40 best stocks to retire on returned -23.07% from 6-20-08 to 6-16-09, relative to the -30.8% returned by the S&P500 during the same time period. This year they are replacing 23 stocks to form the new portfolio.
Provided below are the 40 stocks recommended by Fortune as the best stocks to retire on in 2009 and our outlook of these companies from a valuation perspective based on The Applied Finance Group’s valuation model.

Related Stock Article:
Is Apple a Buy Hold or Sell?, Click Here to View






With Berkshire Hathaway’s annual meeting just behind us, we thought it would be interesting to provide an analysis of the Oracle of Omaha’s companies (ex. Financials) to give you a better idea of their valuation attractiveness. The companies that rank highest on valuation should be more likely to outperform going forward and could represent an attractive investment opportunity.
Year to date Mr. Buffet’s portfolio has delivered an average return of 5.18% compared to the 12.93% delivered by the S&P 500 Index (as of May 8, 2009). In the future we will measure the performance of each of the three groups of stocks we now label as Attractive, Fairly Valued, and Unattractive, in order to see what type of spreads are achieved between them.

If you want to learn more about AFG's Valuation methodology, click here.
Fortune released a list of 40 companies in June 2008 that they labeled as the 40 best stocks to retire on. Although ValueExpectations.com’s research is focused on long-term investing, we believe reviewing companies on a ongoing basis helps to avoid potential pitfalls with bad investments and allows one to take advantage of companies that might be mispriced. For this reason we have ranked all companies in the Fortune 40 portfolio based on Valuation Attractiveness.
Good companies don’t always make good investments! If you believe this is a list of quality companies then that is a wonderful start. But understanding what you are paying for those companies is equally important. Few would argue that Mercedes Benz produces an excellent engineered vehicle and a quality product. However, if that Mercedes Benz cost $1,000,000, it may be a great vehicle, but not necessarily a good price.
As a review of the performance of this list since release, Fortune’s portfolio has returned an average of -28.64% since its release which is about 6.3% spread above what the S&P 500 delivered on average during the same time period. Although this portfolio did outperform the S&P 500, had you invested in these 40 companies in equal parts on the date of release, your $100,000 retirement nest egg would now be worth somewhere around $70,000.
Fortune 40 Companies To Retire On

AFG's Valuation Model – Using AFG’s modified discounted cash flow model to measure the intrinsic value of a firm compared to its peers.






Below is a look at the YTD returns, valuation attractiveness and sales growth expectations of the two biggest and smallest companies in each sector within the S&P 500 (excluding financials). This link provides some insight into Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) valuation techniques. Also compare the expectations for sales growth to what the companies have delivered historically to see which stocks on this list are most likely to meet or exceed those expectations, and thus be more likely to out-perform.

*AFG’s Value Expectation allows us to understand the imbedded Sales Growth, EBITDA Margins, and Asset Turnovers a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory and in normal circumstances, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The table displays the implied future sales growth of companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.






As 2009 approached, USA Today’s market experts gave us their insights/predictions on what they thought would happen in the upcoming year. Even as the world has changed dramatically since this list was released in December 2008, these “guru’s” picks are worthy of some attention to see how their predictions did against the overall Russell 1000 index so far this year. We ran their list through Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) set of screens that identify potential investment opportunities to see which companies they recommended met AFG’s criteria. Below is each expert’s picks and performance along with the performance of the Russell 1000 to benchmark against. The 6 companies highlighted (TAP, CSCO, WMT, PG, ABT, JPM) were the companies that met AFG's Buy Criteria (described below) for a potential investment opportunity and the rest failed to make the grade.


A brief description of The Applied Finance Group's Buy Criteria variables is below:
Economic Margin - A corporate performance measurement that addresses the gaps in GAAP, eliminating distortions caused by accounting policies to measure what a company is truly earning above or below their cost of capital.
Valuation Model – Using AFG’s modified discounted cash flow model to measure the intrinsic value of a firm compared to it's peers.
Management Quality – Assess management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.






As of 3-11-09 there were 7 companies that enjoyed a AAA credit rating from Moody's based on the company's size, stability and ability to pay back debt. GE was recently stripped of its AAA rating and received a lowered rating of AA+. GE was expecting worse news so the fact that they were also labeled “stable” put some worries of a GE bankruptcy to rest and gave GE’s stock price a boost on the same day its rating was lowered.
Below is a list of the AAA rated companies (excluding Berkshire Hathaway BRK/A), their valuation attractiveness, and their Z-scores (likelihood of going bankrupt in the next 2 years). Which of the AAA companies may be the next to join GE in getting a rating downgrade? Automatic Data Processing (ADP) has the lowest Z-score (the least amount of financial strength) and is theoretically the most likely company to have its AAA rating lowered.
The Altman Z-score defined: A metric that gives insights into the likelihood of a firm going bankrupt in the next 2 years. The model was developed by Professor Edward I. Altman of the NYU’s Stern School of Business and first published in The Journal of FINANCE in September 1968. A common critique to this metric is that it was developed over 40 years ago and is no longer relevant.
In 2001, Professor Joseph D. Piotroski of The University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, published a paper called, Value Investing: The Use of Historical Financial Statement Information to Separate Winners from Losers. Piotroski showed that value investors were rewarded by looking at a firm’s financial health and he showed that Z-score was a meaningful statistic.
More recently, on December 5, 2008, Dr. Altman was called to testify before a House of Representatives Committee on the condition of U.S. Automakers. In his testimony, he noted that Bloomberg, Inc. reported, “that approximately 1,000 users of their system per day access the Altman Z-Score model.”
The Altman Z-Score breaks down firms into 3 zones:
• >2.99 – Not Likely to go Bankrupt
• 1.8 - 2.99 – Gray Area
• <1.8 – Likely to go Bankrupt in the Next 2 Years

*AFG’s Value Expectation allows us to understand the imbedded Sales Growth, EBITDA Margins, and Asset Turnovers a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory and in normal circumstances, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The table displays the implied future sales growth of companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.
Recent Market Review:
Obama, the Budget and the “Un” Stimulus package
Visitors Register with Value Expectations to
Access Exclusive Market Reviews and Special Studies:







Fortune magazine recently put out an article listing the most admired companies in the world. We took the top 50 firms (excluding Financials, and companies not traded in the US) on their list and put them through Applied Finance Group's quantitative recommendation framework. Just because these firms are among the most admired companies in the world does not qualify them as the most attractive investment. Being among the most admired is an honor and means you must be doing something right, but might not necessarily mean the share price is currently attractive.
The following articles which we have posted in the past on ValueExpectations.com will give you a better understanding of what it takes for management to create wealth, understand Management Quality, and see how EPS alone falls short in estimating a company’s value. There are two main characteristics a company must have in order to be a good investment opportunity: (1) the company needs to be a strong economic performer, (2) the company should be attractively priced. Many people admired the DeLorean, but it was neither a good performing car nor a good priced car. Below we reveal a few "DeLoreans" after looking under the hood.







Recently Berkshire Hathaway released a letter to its shareholders, which outlined last year’s activities and provided insights on their outlook going forward with an overview of the company's major holdings. Below is a list of Berkshire's major holdings (excluding Financials) and ValueExpectations.com’s recommendations for these companies.
We will revisit this later in the year to see how ValueExpectations.com's recommendations fared.

Applied Finance Group's quantitative process is centered on their proprietary Economic Margin Framework. The core of AFG’s quantitative process starts with evaluating a company's corporate performance and the expected improvement on a relative basis, assessing the valuation attractiveness of the company, and determining if a firm is following a wealth creating or wealth destroying strategy.
A brief description of those variables is below:
Economic Margin - A corporate performance measurement that addresses the gaps in GAAP, eliminating distortions caused by accounting policies to measure what a company is truly earning above or below their cost of capital.
Valuation Model – Using AFG’s modified discounted cash flow model to measure the intrinsic value of a firm compared to it's peers.
Management Quality – Assess management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.






ValueExpectations.com recently posted, “Dividends are falling, so stocks have less value?” which gave some insight on our thoughts on the effect dividends have on stock values. We concluded that dividends alone are irrelevant in estimating a company’s value.
As a follow up to that article we have identified a dozen companies that pay a dividend and have the fundamentals to support the dividend. We looked at several fundamental factors to flush out companies that may be at risk of reducing their dividend in the near future. The end result, was a list of companies with:
-Positive Future Economic Margins
-Low Financial Debt
-High Management Quality
-High Valuation Score
-High Dividend Yield
Solid Companies That Pay A Dividend:

*AFG’s Value Expectation interface allows us to understand the imbedded Sales Growth, EBITDA Margins, and Asset Turnovers a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory and in normal circumstances, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The above table displays the implied future sales growth of these mining companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.
Register with Value Expectations to Access Exclusive Market Reviews and Special Studies:







The Russell 1000 Index has lost 44% over the past year and is down 14% year to date. Similarly, the Russell 2000 Index is down 42% for the past 12 months and lost investors 18% since the beginning of this year. With both of these indexes down substantially recently by about the same amount, are large caps more attractive than small caps?
Percent to Target Charts: This graph shows the Percent to Target Current for a universe relative to the overall market. Values greater than 1 indicate the universe is more undervalued than the market, while values less than 1 indicate the opposite. The red line identifies the historical median value to provide a basis to understand valuation levels relative to historic norms.
Small Universe: Companies in the AFG universe that have a market cap less than $300 million and EPS consensus estimates are available.

This chart illustrates that the median Small Cap company is currently overvalued, relative to the market. Over the past 6 years, small Caps have been trading at a premium to their historic valuation.
Large Universe: Companies in the AFG universe that have a market cap greater than $2 billion and EPS consensus estimates are available.

This chart illustrates that the median Large Cap company is currently undervalued, relative to the market. Large Caps have been trading at a discount to their historic valuation, indicating a potentially attractive opportunity.
Following is a list of the biggest 10 companies (determined by market cap) in the Russell 1000 and Russell 2000. AFG’s Value Expectations interface, which solves for implied sales growth embedded in a stock price (VE Sales Growth), allows us to understand the embedded Sales Growth, EBITDA Margins, and Asset Turnovers a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory, and in normal circumstances, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. An undervalued company is more likely to outperform those companies with high expectations relative to what they have delivered historically. The tables below display the implied future sales growth of these companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at their 5-year median levels.


Conclusion:
Both the percent to target charts and VE analysis show that large caps look more attractive than small cap stocks. The large cap stocks on the list have lower expectations for implied sales growth and the overall universe is currently undervalued.
This data is a sample of our Market Review. Register to view Complete PDF... IT's Fast and FREE
If you are a registered user, click here to access complete PDF of our Market Review






In life, the most attractive people are in shape and have good looks, just look at Hollywood. The same is true the majority of the time in investing. The most attractive stocks have healthy financial statements and look good from a valuation standpoint.
The Altman Z-score is a metric that gives insights into the likelihood of a firm going bankrupt in the next 2 years. The model was developed by Professor Edward I. Altman of the NYU’s Stern School of Business and first published in The Journal of FINANCE in September 1968. A common critique to this metric is that it was developed over 40 years ago and is no longer relevant.
In 2001, Professor Joseph D. Piotroski of The University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, published a paper called, Value Investing: The Use of Historical Financial Statement Information to Separate Winners from Losers. Piotroski showed that value investors were rewarded by looking at a firm’s financial health and he showed that Z-score was a meaningful statistic.
More recently, on December 5, 2008, Dr. Altman was called to testify before a House of Representatives Committee on the condition of U.S. Automakers. In his testimony, he noted that Bloomberg, Inc. reported, “that approximately 1,000 users of their system per day access the Altman Z-Score model.”
The Altman Z-Score breaks down firms into 3 zones:
• >2.99 – Not Likely to Go Bankrupt
• 1.8 - 2.99 – Gray Area
• <1.8 – Likely to Go Bankrupt in the Next 2 Years
Using AFGView.com, we screened for firms that looked relatively attractive from a valuation perspective and had an Altman Z-Score above 2.99. Below is a list of those firms. Later we will look at firms that are expensive and have a Z-Score below 1.8.







For the past 26 years Steven Halpern, editor of thestockadvisors.com has gone to well known and respected advisors once a year to find out which stocks they like for the coming year. Take a look at the list of stocks advisors liked in 2008 and their performance. Also listed are the picks of 75 prominent advisors for 2009 along with sales growth expectations for the companies to justify their current price (VE Sales Growth) which can be compared to what they have delivered in revenue growth over the past 5 years(5 Year Median Sales Growth). These companies are worth a look because they are in favor of well-respected advisors, but the companies that also have low expectations for sales growth priced-in to their stock are especially worthy of a close review.



* denotes # of years historical sales numbers available
VE Sales Growth calculated for these firms on 1-6-09






Value Expectations Equity Research, provides institutional quality stock research through its
investment newsletters and stock blog using AFG’s Economic Margin Framework.
The term Value Expectations is derived from our ability to calculate market expectations embedded in stock prices, sectors and indexes.
![]()
Copyright 2008 | Value Expectations | Contact Us | All Rights Reserved




