Editor Recommended
Stay Connected With VE
MWW
Unattractive Stocks From Every S&P 500 Sector - Coca-Cola Enterprises (NYSE:CCE) and Fedex Corp. (NYSE:FDX)
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
10 Buys And 10 Sells For 2010
By Kai Petainen (Guest Contributor)
Using academically inspired quantitative analysis, here are 10 longs and 10 shorts for 2010.
Pick some stocks, go to an island and come back in a year and see how they did. That's the premise behind an annual stock competition that T.J. White holds each year on Marketocracy's Web site. Dividends are paid, some companies go bankrupt, others are acquired, and basically everyone stays away from the Internet, as they catch fish, drink rum, mingle with the locals and hope that their stocks outperform the others. It's a fun hypothetical game, and in the spirit of that game, I thought it would be fun to pick 20 stocks for 2010: 10 long and 10 short picks.
How have I performed in the competition in the past? Well, in 2005 I chose Tesco Technologies (TESS), Shiloh Industries (SHLO), NewMarket Corp (NEU) and Meridian Resource Corp (TMR) and delivered a poor return of 0.5% vs. 3.0% for the S&P 500. I turned it around in 2006 when I chose Adams Resources & Energy ( AE - news - people ), Ameriprise Financial (AMP), Saia , Stepan Company (SCL) and Books-A-Million (BAMM) and had a superb fourth-place return of 45.2% vs. the S&P 500 of 13.6%.
In 2007, I chose Aegon N.V. (AEG), Encana (ECA), Pioneer Companies (acquired by Olin Corp) (OLN), KT Corp. (KTC) and AstraZeneca (AZN) and had a respectable return of 9.2% vs 3.6% for the S&P 500. The unfriendly year of 2008 wasn't kind to me, and my picks of Brasil Telecom (BTM), Miranda Gold (MAD), China Petroleum (SNP), Validus Holdings (VR) and Venteco PLC (VTO) had a dismal return of -40.4% vs. the S&P 500 at -38.8%.
In 2009, I chose BCE ( BCE) Chinacast Education (CAST), Nova Chemicals (NCX), Koninklijke Philips Electronics ( PHG) and Allianz SE (AZSEY). They had a return of 67% vs. the S&P 500 at 23.5%. Overall, I'm quite happy with my returns, but how will I do this upcoming year? I'm not sure, but it's fun to try.
How Did I Pick the Stocks?
I started my search for stocks via FactSet's incredibly versatile quant screening tool. Through FactSet, I was able to make a simple, quick quant screen and in the spirit of 2010, I chose these 10 factors.
For the long picks, I was ranking stocks based on: Low price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio, low price/book, high Piotroski score, low F-Score, low accruals, insider buying, low short interest, earnings momentum, sales growth and institutional buying. Basically, stocks looked good to me, would generally have a "value", "quality," "smart money" and "growth" story associated with them. I would not look at news, technical charting analysis, bid/ask spread, transaction costs, product quality, analyst research reports, taxes, risk, beta, political factors or economic macro variables. The analysis would follow a quant/value based approach, and to which I do acknowledge there are certainly some pros/cons associated with that approach. Short picks on the other hand, generally (not always) had a: high P/E, high price/book, low Piotroski score, high F-score, high accruals, insider selling, high short interest, negative earnings momentum, low (or very high) sales growth and institutional selling. That first cut, produced a series of stocks and from there it was onto some valuation analysis and creating some target prices.
Valuation analysis was performed using The Applied Finance Group's quantitative (AFG)-valuation model. Each stock was placed through their default assumptions. If the stock passed, I ran another valuation using a discount rate of 8% and a CAP (competitive advantage period) of 10 years. For the long picks, I chose (what I considered to be) conservative valuations, and for the short picks, I chose the optimistic valuations.
What about the Market?
I'm not an economist, I have no idea what will happen in the upcoming year. I won't even pretend to know, but for fun I attempted a valuation of the market. Each component of the Dow Jones was valued, target prices were created and that in turn created a valuation for me. How accurate is this? I have no idea, but I figured if people could make valuation targets for the Dow of 5,000, 20,000, and other seemingly random numbers then it wouldn't hurt to try. So, hypothetically, just for fun, an optimistic target for the end of 2010 for the Dow is (and I have virtually no confidence in this) 10,082. Are you a pessimist? Dow 8,140.
My 2010 Picks
So, here they are, my 10 Long and 10 Short picks for 2010 and some target prices. Feel free to disagree, and at the end of next year, I'll come back and see which ones I got right, and which ones I got wrong. Now to escape to an island, mingle with the locals and create some sand castles.
Kai Petainen
Visit His Site
Tozzi Finance Center Manager
Ross School of Business
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Unattractive S&P 500 Companies - Including Goodyear Tire & Rubber (NYSE:GT) and Monsanto Company (NYSE:MON)
The Applied Finance Group (AFG) works with some of the most well respected investment firms in the U.S. to help them develop quantitative screening processes to identify a better pool of companies to choose from for their portfolio holdings. However, picking winning investment opportunities isn’t the only value AFG provides clients. AFG also develops quantitative strategies to quickly identify possible torpedoes lurking in your client or prospective client’s portfolio.
AFG’s quantitative process is centered on the proprietary Economic Margin (EM) Framework (what a company earns above its true cost of capital). The core of AFG’s quantitative process starts with evaluating corporate performance and the expected improvement relative to their peers, evaluating 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 available below the list of companies.
When identifying potential torpedoes AFG looks for companies with the least valuation upside compared to their sector peers, below sector median expected Economic Margin change, and a management quality score that reflects a management team following a wealth destroying strategy.
These 12 S&P 500 companies are potential torpedoes that could be lurking in your portfolio. These companies all possess characteristics that make for a bad investment opportunity. If you own one of these companies or consider adding one to your portfolio, we suggest taking a closer look as they look the most likely to underperform their sector peers according to criteria that has proven successful at identifying winners and losers in the market.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AFG's Valuation Metric – Measures the percent to target (deviation between a stock’s current trading price and its AFG current default target price). To derive the intrinsic value of a firm, AFG uses its proprietary Valuation Model (modified discounted cash flow model).
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.
Management Quality – Assesses management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
The Most Unattractive S&P 500 Stocks: Avoid Companies Like… United Parcel Service (NYSE:UPS) and Tyson Foods (NYSE:TSN)
The Applied Finance Group (AFG) works with some of the most well respected investment firms in the U.S. to help them develop quantitative screening processes to identify a better pool of companies to choose from for their portfolio holdings. However, picking winning investment opportunities isn’t the only value AFG provides clients. AFG also develops quantitative strategies to quickly identify possible torpedoes lurking in your client or prospective client’s portfolio.
AFG’s quantitative process is centered on the proprietary Economic Margin (EM) Framework (what a company earns above its true cost of capital). The core of AFG’s quantitative process starts with evaluating corporate performance and the expected improvement relative to their peers, evaluating 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 available below the list of companies.
When identifying potential torpedoes AFG looks for companies with the least valuation upside compared to their sector peers, below sector median expected Economic Margin change, and a management quality score that reflects a management team following a wealth destroying strategy.
These 20 S&P 500 companies from every major AFG defined sector (ex. Financials) are potential torpedoes that could be lurking in your portfolio. These companies all possess characteristics that make for a bad investment opportunity. If you own one of these companies or consider adding one to your portfolio, we suggest taking a closer look as they look the most likely to underperform their sector peers according to criteria that has proven successful at identifying winners and losers in the market.
If you are a professional investor and would like to learn more about AFG’s EM methodology, investment criteria or stock selection process click here to register to trial the product.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AFG's Valuation Metric – Measures the percent to target (deviation between a stock’s current trading price and its AFG current default target price). To derive the intrinsic value of a firm, AFG uses its proprietary Valuation Model (modified discounted cash flow model).
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.
Management Quality – Assesses management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.
+View our List of Value Expepectations Recommended Articles
AFG Recommendation Performance
9/1998 – 5/2009
Annualized Returns
Other Market Related Articles of Interest
Source: AFGView client databases from 9/1998 – 5/2009
Universe size: 4,000 to 5,500 firms
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Identifying Large Cap Investment Opportunities - Including McDonalds (NYSE:MCD) Sprint (NYSE:S) and Hasbro (NYSE:HAS)
The Applied Finance Group (AFG) has a disciplined approach for identifying companies that are expected to outperform and underperform the market by using proprietary metrics and measurements that have been tested and proven through time. Because AFG’s research is fundamentally derived, AFG’s quantitative analysis spans across growth and value stocks, all sectors, industries, and market caps with over 20,000 covered securities globally. Using AFG’s proprietary criteria, AFG publishes a monthly buy/sell list to provide clients with a refined focused list as a starting point for potential investments. AFG clients can then use Value Expectations to further analyze the expectations embedded in a security’s price and to build out their own model to refine an intrinsic value of a company based on their own expectations.
When searching for Large-Cap ideas, AFG’s Buy/Sell list is a good starting place as it has proven to create a significant spread in performance between companies that come up on AFG’s buy list and those on the sell list. Further focusing on companies based on AFG’s proprietary screening criteria (Economic Margin, valuation, quality of earnings, and management’s ability to create shareholder wealth) will save investors time in their research process. The result is a target group of stocks that can help you outperform as well as identify potential torpedoes to avoid in your portfolios.
Below is a list of attractive and unattractive companies in the S&P 500 from each major sector (as defined by AFG). It serves as a focus list of companies for investors to begin with as they meet AFG’s criteria. They are more likely to outperform their sector peers and the S&P 500, the benchmark that AFG’s clients most often compare themselves with.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Source: EconomicMargin.com
AFG's Valuation Metric – Measures the percent to target (deviation between a stock’s current trading price and its AFG current default target price). To derive the intrinsic value of a firm, AFG uses its proprietary Valuation Model (modified discounted cash flow model).
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.
Management Quality – Assesses management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.
________________________________________________________________
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.
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
AFG HOT STOCKS SIZZLE - August Stocks to Buy and Sell
In yesterdays article we provided an update of the performance of our annual HOT STOCK LIST:
We also provided an update of the performance of the Toreador Large Cap Fund, TORLX which uses AFG’s Economic Margin Framework as part of its investment philosophy.
As you may note, both have done very well!
Today we decided to provide a Buy/Sell list to VE’s registered visitors applying some of these same investment principles: Economic Margin, Management Quality, and a company's Percent to Target (the deviation between a stock's current trading price and its current default target price according to AFG).
Below is a preview of the list which includes a Buy/Sell Recommendation on each Stock. The complete list, accessible to Value Expectations registered users, contains around 500 Stocks.
| S&P 500 Rank (Preview) - August 11th 2009 | |||
| Ticker | Company | Price | Recommendation |
| DRI | DARDEN RESTAURANTS | 32.61 | Strong Buy |
| KR | KROGER CO THE | 20.93 | Strong Buy |
| WLP | WELLPOINT INC | 51.9 | Strong Buy |
| AOC | AON CORP | 40.55 | Buy |
| FLR | FLUOR CORP | 57.49 | Buy |
| PCG | PG&E CORP | 40.36 | Buy |
| AMT | AMERICAN TOWER CORP | 32.37 | Neutral |
| IRM | IRON MOUNTAIN INC | 28.85 | Neutral |
| NOV | NATIONAL OILWELL VARCO | 37.1 | Neutral |
| BEN | FRANKLIN RESOURCES INC | 92.13 | Sell |
| EXPD | EXPEDITORS INTL WASH INC | 33.04 | Sell |
| QCOM | QUALCOMM INC | 45.74 | Sell |
| JDSU | JDS UNIPHASE CORP | 5.93 | Strong Sell |
| MWW | MONSTER WORLDWIDE INC | 14.9 | Strong Sell |
| NYT | NEW YORK TIMES | 8.1 | Strong Sell |
Source: The Applied FInance Group
To download the complete list click here.
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
AFG's Monthly Buy-Sell List
As some investors may believe the market is starting to show "signs of recovery", many of the over 200 institutional firms The Applied Finance Group (AFG) works with can always take advantage of identifying mispriced securities. While some of AFG’s clients might have a specific focus on growth or value, most subscribe to the practice of buying growth at a discount (growth at a reasonable price GARP) and avoiding “value traps.”
In October 2008 AFG released the study, Then and Now, discussing the low expectations priced into the market "Today many world-class franchises are available at expectations reflecting a very bearish future. Over 150 companies in the S&P 500 (industrials) have negative sales growth expectations embedded into their current market valuations". Following that study AFG issued another study, Analyzing Market Troughs and Rebounds, which pointed out that historical market recoveries have been typically dominated by value stocks.
Whether you are looking for value or more growth oriented securities, we have provided a list of companies in various asset classes, Large Cap Growth, Large Cap Value, Small Cap Growth, Small Cap Value that are currently on AFG’s Buy and Sell list. If you are a professional investor and would like to view a complete buy and sell list or take a trial of AFG's valuation tools CLICK HERE.
Monthly Buy/Sell list Across the Market
The Applied Finance Group has a disciplined approach for identifying companies that are expected to outperform and underperform the market by using proprietary metrics and measurements that have been tested and proven through time. Because AFG’s research is fundamentally derived, AFG’s quantitative analysis spans across growth and value stocks, all sectors, industries, and market caps with over 4,500 covered securities. By using AFG’s proprietary criteria, AFG publishes a monthly buy/sell list to provide clients with a refined focused list as a starting point for all investments. This focus List of stocks has outperformed the market on an annual basis by greater than 10% with our buy portfolio and underperformed the market by 10% with our sell portfolio. AFG clients then use Value Expectations to further analyze the expectations embedded in a security’s price (example of expectations embedded in the entire S&P500 over the next 5 years below) and to build out their own model to refine an intrinsic value of a company based on their own expectations.
Select Companies From AFG's Current Monthly Buy-Sell List
(Source: The Applied Finance Group)
Again, If you are a professional investor and would like to view a complete buy and sell list or take a trial of AFG's valuation tools CLICK HERE.
Model Portfolio Buy/Sell Results
To view how AFG defines the Large/Small and Growth/Value universe Click Here.
A brief description of some other of AFG's insights:
AFG's Valuation Metric – Measures the percent to target (deviation between a stock’s current trading price and its AFG current default target price). To derive the intrinsic value of a firm, AFG uses its proprietary Valuation Model (modified discounted cash flow model).
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.
Management Quality – Assesses management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.
AFG's Value Universe - Companies in the AFG universe, which have MV/IC at the bottom 50% of the universe and have EPS estimates.
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
S&P 500 - Potential Torpedoes (ex. Financials)
ValueExpectations.com has continued to provide investment ideas to help our readers make better informed investment decisions which leads to outperformance. In addition to finding buy opportunities, VE.com also understands the importance of avoiding potential torpedo’s given the current market volatility.
ValueExpectations.com has compiled a list of potential torpedo stocks within the S&P 500 that all contain several characteristics that AFG finds unattractive when searching for potential investment ideas. If one of these firms is a portfolio holding we recommend careful evaluation as they could all be torpedo’s.
The 15 firms listed below all meet AFG’s Strong Sell Criteria. In addition, these companies are all projected to earn less than their cost of capital which means they will earn a negative Economic Margin and all of these companies have a Z-Score (Altman Z-Score) in the at-risk range or risk of bankruptcy in the next 2 years. For a review of your current holdings using AFG’s research tools CLICK HERE FOR A FREE TRIAL.
S&P 500 - Potential Torpedoes (ex. Financials)
AFG Sell Criteria: When identifying possible sell/short opportunities (torpedoes) The Applied Finance Group (AFG) starts by running a screen using its proprietary Sell Criteria variables starting with Economic Margin. Economic Margin is a measure of corporate performance that identifies how profitable a company is by measuring how much the company earns above or below its cost of capital. In addition to corporate performance, AFG looks to identify those companies that are unattractively priced using our valuation model. Lastly AFG evaluates how well companies run their business using its Management Quality score, identifying companies that have management teams that destroy wealth.
Economic Margin (EM) Defined - A measure of corporate performance that captures off balance sheet items, by looking at how much a company is earning above or below their cost of capital. EM is expressed in a % or margin. The Economic Margin Framework™ is more than just a performance metric as it encompasses a valuation system that explicitly addresses the four main drivers of enterprise value: profitability, competition, growth and cost of capital.
The Altman Z-score - 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
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Super Bowl Boost?
One would think that $3 million is too much to pay for a 30 second commercial for the Super Bowl, but maybe not when considering the correlation between the likeability of a company’s super bowl ads and its stock price. Companies that run well-liked commercials have performed relatively well in recent years as investors respond by driving up their share prices not just for the day after the Super Bowl, but for weeks thereafter.
Kenneth Kim, an Assoc. Professor of Finance from the University of Buffalo, studied 102 publicly traded companies that ran 529 commercials in the last 17 Super Bowls, and although the majority of those firms saw a boost after gameday, the companies that saw the biggest boost were the ones with the most liked ads according to USA Today's Ad Meter.
These commercials bring companies into the conscious of consumers as well as investors, and the most liked commercials appear to have had the best effect on the advertising company’s stock performance. From 1996-2007 Super Bowl advertising companies outperformed the S&P 500 by 1.3% and 10 out of the last 12 years.
Let’s take a look at the companies that ran commercials during the 2009 Super Bowl and the implied sales growth expectations priced-in to their stocks. The more realistic the expectations for the implied sales growth are, compared to what the company has delivered historically in sales growth, will give you an idea of which firms are most likely to meet or exceed those expectations. The more realistic the expectations the more likely the company is to out-perform.We will keep an eye out for these stocks short-term to see if any boost in stock performance was realized within the post Super Bowl week.
Company's That Advertised During the Super Bowl with Each Companies Sales Expectations
** denotes Sales information gathered from AFG Global Database.
And the best Super Bowl commercial according to USA Today Ad Meter is....
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
The Magic Formula Screen
In Joel Greenblatt’s 2006 book, The Little Blue Book that Beats the Market, he presented his “Magic Formula” used in his hedge fund, Gotham Capital. Mr Greenblatt tested his formula between 1988 and 2004. The results were incredible, with only one down year, the magic portfolio would have returned 30.8% a year, against a 12.4% annual return for the S&P 500.
Mr. Greenblatt was a student of both Ben Graham and Warren Buffet and tried to include valuable insights from each investor in his “Magic Formula.” His Magic Formula was a screen that percentile ranked two variables: Return on Invested Capital (quality) and Earnings Yield (valuation). The idea is simple, buy the best companies at the best price. He also recommends one year holding periods, so we thought this would be a great time to get this list out. The Little Blue Book recommends selecting the top 30 firms from the “Magic Formula.” That formula ranks each company by variable and then puts a 50% weight on each. Below is a definition of each variable.
Variable 1: Return on Invested Capital = EBIT / (Net Working Capital + Net Fixed assets)
Variable 2: Earnings Yield = EBIT/EV
The table below shows the top 30 firms with their market implied sales growth expectations. Enjoy!
- Value Expectations's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Stay Connected With Value Expectations
