APH

Investors who use The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) research and suite of investment tools have the ability to easily understand a company’s true economic profitability, as well as if the company’s asset management policy is suitable to maximize that profitability.

A company that earns above its cost of capital (positive Economic Margins) and is growing its asset base is considered to be following a wealth-creating strategy. Backtests have proven these companies to be more likely to outperform those companies following a wealth-destroying strategy (negative Economic Margins and growing assets). Avoiding firms with management teams who try to grow a negative profitability business has helped our clients since 1996 avoid potential torpedoes in the market. AFG believes that if a firm is not profitable, it needs to divest losers and focus on its core competencies to get its profitability levels back on track and earn the right to grow, rather than throw more money at a losing business. After getting an understanding of how profitable a firm is and which direction the firm’s profitability is headed, investors must then understand how much a company is growing out its assets to take advantage of its current profitability or what to divest in order to fix its profitability.

Beyond having positive Economic Margins (EMs) and growing assets, investors want to see a company improve its EMs at a greater rate than its sector peers, as these companies have also proven to be more likely to outperform than companies with declining EMs. AFG’s Wealth Creation Report (WCR) allows you to visually analyze a company’s historical EM level, current EM and expected change in EM based on projections built out by AFG’s default valuation model, which takes into account the total cash flow a company delivers.

Below are a few examples of companies AFG considers to be following wealth-creating or wealth-destroying strategies, identified by using AFG’s Wealth Creation Report.

Best Buy: Consistent Wealth Creator

Amphenol Corp: Consistent Wealth Creator

Cognizent Technology Solutions: Consistent Wealth Creator

Southwest Airlines: Consistent Wealth Destroyer

Micron Technology: Consistent Wealth Destroyer

Electronic Arts: Growth at the expense of its Economic Margins (Wealth Destroyer)

AFG's Wealth Creation Report is a 3 part chart :

The first chart is a summary of a company’s economic performance over time, as well as insight into how analyst EPS forecasts project AFG’s default EMs over the next two years.

• EM – Productive Capital = (Cash Flow minus Capital Charge excluding Intangibles) divided by the

Inflation Adjusted Productive Capital.

• EM – Invested Capital = (Cash Flow minus Capital Charge including Intangibles) divided the by

Inflation Adjusted Productive Capital.

•Val Score = Ranked Percent To Target for the current calendar yr. where 100 is the most undervalued

and 0 is the most overvalued (ranked across all firms in database with forecasts for 4,000 firms).

• EM Chg = One year out forecast EM minus last reported fiscal year's EM. Invested Capital EM is used.

The second part of the chart is the Asset Growth chart allows additional insight not only the growth of a company, but how that company’s growth strategy has affected their economic performance.

 • Assets – Steady Growth (1 Yr) = The real growth rate at which a firm can increase its capital base

given internally generated cash, while maintaining a constant capital structure.

• Assets – Actual Growth (1 Yr) = Real year over year change in Inflation Adjusted Invested Capital

achieved by the firm. Note: All actual growth is “actual”, i.e. 2007 growth represents growth from most

recent quarterly balance sheet.

This data can then be used to identify how the stock has performed in relation to the market place.

• Return Net Market = The company's cumulative total return relative to the cumulative market-weighted

average total return of the largest 2000 companies for the equivalent time period.

Traditional Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) models have been been underutilized in equity analysis over the years primarily because of the assumptions one has to sign off on. We will concentrate on just two of the major issues we have with traditional DCF models, the lack of ability to deal with competition and the perpetuity assumption embedded in a DCF model. These assumptions lead to irrational calculations of intrinsic value and force analysts to make compromising decisions in their model building efforts.

AFG uses a modified DCF model that accurately addresses the competitive nature of the business while also dealing with the perpetuity issue through our Economic Margin decay or competitive advantage period.

The four factors that affect AFG’s Competitive Advantage Period (CAP) are;

Profitability – High Profit leads to increased competition and a higher decay rate
Variability – Higher volatility leads to less predictability and a higher decay rate
Trend – AFG gives the benefit of the doubt to an upward trend which leads to a lower decay rate
Invested Capital – Large Invested Capital creates barriers to entry and leads to lower decay rate

The Decay Rate is the rate at which the Economic Margins™ will diminish over time due to competition, market conditions and limited investment opportunities. Higher decay rates translate into shorter competitive advantage periods, while lower decay rates translate into longer competitive advantage periods.

The Decay Rate profile is downward sloping to the right, which means that Economic Margins™ over time diminish to zero. This does not mean that the company will not have earnings, but instead the company will have an Economic Margin™ of zero, which indicates there are no excess profits after the investors are paid and the depreciating assets are replaced.When selecting securities, companies that are maintaining a high level of economic profitability or growing their profits rapidly are attractive from an investment standpoint. However, the more profitable a firm is the more likely other companies will attempt compete away excess returns.

To illustrate this, one has to look no further than Dell Computer. Dell Computer had Economic Margins™ hovering around 40% (top 5% of all companies) in 1997 and 1998, but soon every major firm was announcing that they were going to build computers to order. Why? Because they saw the huge profits that Dell was making. The result is that Dell's Economic Margin™ for 1999 was around 25%, a decline of 37.5% in just one year. The remaining factors are relatively straight-forward, in that volatile returns are worth less than consistent returns, companies with an increasing Economic Margins™ are worth more than a company in decline, and large companies have a natural barrier to entry, thus a lower decay rate.

Theory: Excess return gets competed away

Fact: In 1997, the median top decile Economic Margin (EM) firm = 17.4%. 10 years later, that same group of companies had a median EM of 6.5%. On the other hand, the bottom decile had an EM of -12.2%, 10 years later that same group had a median EM of -1.0%.

Current Top Decile Economic Margin Companies (S&P 500 ex. financials)

Join Value Expectations... it's FAST and FREE!

Economic Margin is a measure of economic profitability that identifies how much a company earns above or below its cost of capital. We analyzed all companies in the S&P500 Index based on their historical, current and forecasted Economic Margins to see which firms have the best average of past, present and future profitability. We identified the two most profitable and the two least profitable companies from each sector and have presented them in the table below. As a base of reference, the average firm in corporate America earns a 0 (zero) Economic Margin, or is a “break-even business”. Our research has shown that companies with consistently positive EMs that are also expected to increase their EMs in the future tend to outperfom firms with negative or declining EMs.
<!--[if gte mso 10]> Economic Margin is a corporate performance measure, which helps us identify well managed, wealth creating companies. Although not included in this post, we want to remind you that it is also important to understand the attractiveness of corporations' valuations to make sure we invest in great companies at great prices. (Here is an article by ValueExpectations.com explaining Applied Finance Group’s basic valuation concepts).

Note: Only companies in the S&P 500 were included.

S&P 500 Companies With The Best/Worst Average Profitability (Economic Margin)

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. more EM details (PDF)

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.

Sales Expectations for Companies with an Attractive Valuation and Healthy Balance Sheet