SII

Today we will highlight the top performers in the S&P 500 year-to-date as well as provide a few company names that look the most attractive and unattractive according to The Applied Finance Group (AFG). AFG’s valuation techniques have proven successful since 1996 at identifying mispriced securities and helping their clients take advantage of those market inefficiencies. Beyond valuation AFG helps clients understand the true economic profitability a company earns by using their Economic Margin methodology. We are providing a list of the top 25 performing stocks in the S&P 500 index to keep up to date on which companies have lead the way thus far in 2010. Also by using AFG's research and valuation model we have provided further analysis on 7 of the top performing companies, 3 that we find attractive going forward and 4 that we find unattractive, based on valuation attractiveness, expected improvement in economic profitability and the overall investment attractiveness, which is based on various criteria AFG uses when identifying long/short opportunities.

A list of the 25 top performing stocks of 2010 (ex. Financials) from within the S&P 500 index. We have taken the top 25 companies from 2010 and provided our readers 3 attractive and 5 unattractive stocks from this list based on their valuation attractiveness relative to sector peers and overall investment opportunity using key criteria that The Applied Finance Group (AFG) uses in its stock selection process including corporate performance, management quality and earnings quality to see which of the top performers still look to have upside and which look like they have run out of room to run.

The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) Earnings Quality variable is an important indicator of companies that may be more likely to have negative earnings surprises and underperform due to high amounts of accruals. With many firms under pressure to meet sales expectations in the current environment, it is important to watch out for those firms that may be trying to pad their sales numbers, ie. Channel stuffing (sending excess inventory to stores that cannot sell their products).

The EQ score ranges from 1 to 100, 1 being the best EQ score resulting from the lowest accruals, and 100 being the worst EQ score indicating the highest accruals. Because high EQ score companies (bad Earnings Quality) are more likely to have negative earnings surprises, you may want to avoid these firms. Our back-test indicates that the EQ variable works well as an exclusionary variable coupled with AFG’s valuation model.

We screened the S&P500 to identify those firms with the worst Earnings Quality (EQ), which may be possible torpedoes. The Chart Below displays the 14 firms along with their EQ scores and our valuation analysis.

 

Earnings Quality: Accruals

•An accrual is the difference between Cash Flow and Net Income.

•Net Income = Cash Flow + Accruals

•Low Accrual companies outperform high accrual companies

Two ways to approach accruals:

1. Cash Flow Statement
•Difference between Net Income and Cash Flow

2. Balance Sheet
•Change in Net Operating Assets from Period t-1 to t
•Net Operating Asset equals Total Assets Less Cash, Less Non-Debt Liabilities (excl. Minority Interest)

-Our studies show that the Balance Sheet approach is superior to the Cash Flow Statement approach.

-We found the Balance Sheet approach is also easier to expand to international companies.

 14 Worst Earnings Quality Firms

 

Here is a look at how well the Earnings Quality variable works when you split top half vs. bottom half in each sector/style.

Source: AFGView client databases from 9/1998 - 5/2009   Universe size: 4,000 to 5,500 firms

 

Here is a look at an example of a poor Earnings Quality company that has a negative earning surprise and thus underperforms.

Eastman Kodak

If you like this article, you might be interested in stocks that fit our Buy Reccomendations: Click here to read

A brief description of some other 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.

To identify potentially attractive investment ideas, AFG usually uses a combination of proprietary variables to develop of focused group of potential buy ideas that meet criteria based on valuation, economic performance, management quality, and Earnings Quality. In December of 2008 ValueExpectations.com released a list of companies narrowed only by the valuation properties of the company using AFG’s Value Score (defined below). Our valuation techniques have proven successful through time at identifying mispriced securities and helping our clients identify investment opportunities resulting in outperforming their chosen benchmark. .

The ValueExpectations.com blog posted in December 08 (High Value Score Stocks - S&P 500) contained these high Value Score companies (DDS, S, NOV, MTW, SII, WFR, CHK) had returned 40% above the S&P 500 as of our 3-26-09 performance update and a recent check of that performance on 5-5-09 was even better, currently these companies have returned an astounding 64.5% above the return of the S&P 500 during the same time period (12-29-08 to 5-5-09).

In this exercise we used valuation independent of other key proprietary variables we use to identify good investment opportunities. Although valuation works well on a stand-alone basis, it works even better when used with AFG’s Economic Margin, Management Quality, and Earnings Quality variables.

Listed below are the top 10 companies in the S&P 500 (excluding Financials) based on AFG Value Score alone. These companies all look the most attractive from a valuation perspective relative to the rest of the index.

AFG High Value Score Stocks

 

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

AFG's Value Score - A score which represents the ranked percent to target (deviation between stock’s current trading price and AFG’s current default target price) or attractiveness (upside) relative to the universe. A Value Score of 100 is the most undervalued and 0 is the most overvalued company in the universe.

In our March Monthly Market Review we released a series of graphs representing the valuation attractiveness of each sector relative to its historical norms and to the entire AFG universe. Below is a graph representing the Capital Goods sector which is attractively priced when you compare against its historical trading ranges (red line) and when comparing against the overall AFG Universe (represented by the value of 1). Only in 1998 has the sector looked more attractive since our valuation tracking started in 1996. Listed are 10 companies in the Capital Goods sector that meet AFG’s Buy Criteria and look attractive from a valuation standpoint. Also listed below the graphs are an explanation of AFG’s Buy Criteria and AFG’s Percent to Target Charts.

 

Capital Goods Relative Valuation Chart

 

10 Capital Goods Companies (S&P 500) With Attractive Valuations

 

Percent to Target Chart -This graph shows the Percent to Target Current (Valuation Attractiveness) 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. This example illustrates that the median Large Cap company is undervalued relative to the market currently and has been trading at a discount to its historic relative valuation, indicating a potentially attractive opportunity.

 

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 its peers.

Management Quality – Assess management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.

 

Visitors Register with Value Expectations to
Access Exclusive Market Reviews and Special Studies:


 

Fidelity’s Low Priced Stock Fund, which launched in 1989 (18 Billion AUM) and is managed by Joel Tillinghast, follows a simple strategy… Only invest in stocks with a share price under $35. This strategy first started with Tillinghast only investing in stocks below $10 a share, but later he moved the limit up to $35 a share. He argues that share price alone is not important but that the small-cap universe contains the most frequently mispriced stocks and the least amount of analyst coverage.

Although his fund at best has been a market performer as of late, Tillinghast had taken advantage of such mispricing’s during the last 15 years, averaging an 11% annual return compared to the 6% return earned by the S&P 500 over the same period. The fund had been closed to investors since 2003, but was recently reopened in December. Fidelity says they reopened the fund to get more cash inflow to be able to take advantage of all of the investment opportunities they see in the market.

Below is a list of the top holdings in Fidelity’s Low Priced Stock Fund as well as stocks that AFG believes are attractively priced in three price brackets: under $10, $10 to $20, and $20 to $35. Compare the implied sales growth priced-in to justify the current trading price (VE Sales Growth) vs. what the company has delivered in sales growth the past 5 years (5 Year Median Sales Growth) to see if the expectations are realistic for the company to achieve. The more realistic the expectations are, compared to what has been delivered, the more likely the firm will be to out-perform.

 

Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) Value Score defined - A score which represents the ranked percent to target (deviation between stock’s current trading price and AFG’s current default target price) or attractiveness (upside) relative to the universe. A Value Score of 100 is the most undervalued and 0 is the most overvalued company in the universe.

These stocks all have an AFG Value Score above 95 which means these companies are in the top 5% in percentage upside relative to the universe based on AFG’s default target price. All of these companies also have lower sales growth numbers priced-in to justify the current stock price (VE Sales Growth) than what the company has achieved in the last 5 years (5 Year Median Sales Growth). Low expectations for sales growth compared to the actual sales growth achieved is a good sign the company can beat those expectations and will be more likely to out-perform. Low expectations coupled with attractive default AFG Valuation is a good starting point when looking for possible investment opportunities. Although these companies may not be able to achieve the same levels of sales growth they have experienced in the past 5 years, the expectations are so low that they do not have to return to those numbers to beat the very low expectations.

 

High Value Score (AFG) Stocks & Their Sales Expectations

Nearly all of the biggest return earning companies in the S&P 500 are firms that have been beaten up over the past few months but have bounced back to provide the biggest return in the entire index for the month of December. These firms have ended 2008 on a high note and move into 2009 with what they hope to be sustainable momentum.

The list of companies in the S&P 500 with the worst returns in December had also been trending downward for the past few months but were unable to muster a year-end turnaround as those on the other list had been able accomplish. Many of the firms on this list have something to do with oil, as their stock prices have been highly correlated with the falling price of oil.

Compare the sales growth priced-in to justify the current stock price (VE Sales Growth), to what the company has been able to deliver the past 5 years in revenue growth (5 Year Median Sales Growth), to see which companies have reasonable expectations of achieving the Sales Growth priced-in. Companies with low expectations relative to what they have been able to achieve are more likely to out-perform.

 

Sales Growth Expectations for the Highest Return Companies (S&P 500) - December

**denotes only 2 years historical sales growth available (2 year median used)

 

Sales Growth Expectations for the Lowest Return Companies (S&P 500) - December

 

VE Sales Growth Calculated for these firms on 12/26/08.

EQ is important in this current market environment because so many companies are feeling pressure to meet their sales expectations. Many companies are channel-stuffers, which is one form of accruals that often leads to negative earnings surprises. A recent poster-child for this example of sending excess inventory to stores that could not sell their products would be Crocs and the way they tried to pad their sales numbers.

Earnings Quality: Accrual

•An accrual is the difference between Cash Flow and Net Income.

•Net Income = Cash Flow + Accruals

•Low Accrual companies outperform high accrual

 Two ways to approach accruals:

1. Cash Flow Statement

•Difference between Net Income and Cash Flow

2. Balance Sheet

•Change in Net Operating Assets from Period t-1 to t

•Net Operating Asset equals Total Assets Less Cash, Less Non-Debt Liabilities (excl. Minority Interest)

-Our studies show that the Balance Sheet approach is superior to the Cash Flow Statement approach.

-We found the Balance Sheet approach is also easier to expand to international companies.

 We screened the  S&P500 to identify those firms with the worst EQ scores. The score is given from 1-100, 1 being the best EQ company, 100 being the company with the highest amount of accruals and the worst EQ. Because high EQ companies are more likely to have negative earnings surprises, this is a group of companies you may want to avoid. The EQ variable works well as an exclusionary variable coupled with AFG’s valuation model.

After running our screen we identified 14 firms as the worst Earnings Quality firms. You can set yourself up for success and save time by narrowing your list of constituents to only those that meet our standard valuation, Economic Margin and Management Quality checks and following that up by filtering out those companies most likely to have negative earnings surprises (high EQ). The Chart Below identifies the firms that met our screen criteria, along with the EQ score and our VE analysis.

 

Worst 10% Earnings Quality Companies In the S&P 500

 

 

Universe Size: 4,000 to 5,000 Firms

Source: Applied Finance Group Database from 9/1998-5/2008

 This variable does not add any value for companies within the financial sector and those companies are automatically screened out when using this variable.

Recently we also screened the S&P 500 to identify investment opportunities and identified over 150 companies (industrials) that have negative sales growth expectations embedded into their current market valuations. These companies include high quality companies such as: COH, DOW, CAH, TGT, JNJ, UTX, SBUX, and WAG, among others. If you would like to Read our study Click Here