COL

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!

Below is a summary of 22 AFG Buy Recommendations from the S&P500 Index. The report highlights the 2 companies from each sector (ex. financials) that have the most attractive value score and are currently rated Buys by The Applied Finance Group, Ltd. (AFG). Factors used to derive a AFG’s recommendation include: Expected change in Economic Margins, Intrinsic Value, and Management Quality.

We also ran a VE analysis and provided the results. The VE analysis of each company is used to identify implied sales growth expectations versus what the company has delivered historically in sales growth over the past 5 years. Measuring the spread between a company’s VE sales growth expectations and what it has historically delivered should give you a good idea of which companies have the best chance of meeting or exceeding those expectations, and thus are more likely to outperform.

 Cheapest Companies In The S&P 500 By Sector (ex. Financials)

 Click Here, to see results of our portfolio performance using AFG's Buy/Sell criteria

A brief description of AFG'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.

 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.

VE Sales Growth - AFG’s Value Expectations allows us to understand the Sales Growth, EBITDA Margin, and Asset Turnover a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The VE Sales Growth displays the implied future Sales Growth of the company assuming their EBITDA Margins and Asset Turnovers stay at the 5 year historic median levels.

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)

Now that the nearly $800 billion Stimulus Package is signed into a law, the question is how its provisions would affect the different industries, which companies would present attractive investment opportunities and which ones we should avoid. After discussing the possible effects on the Solar Industry, we now turn our look to the Defense Industry.

Defense companies have enjoyed an abundance of government funding over the last several years. The estimated Defense Military outlays for 2009 are approximately 650 Billion, more than double the amount of the last budget before 9/11. As a result companies involved with defense, homeland security and aerospace have outperformed the broader markets, with the SPADE® Defense Index (AMEX: DXS) beating the S&P500 Index by 80.3% cumulatively for the 9/10/01 – 2/23/09 period.

However, this process may be coming to an end. Although historically defense spending has not been much correlated with trends in the overall economy, increase in government deficits related to recent federal bailouts and reduced tax revenue may lead to downward pressure on defense budgets. Tom Shanker of The New York Times expects U.S. Defense department to scale back on spending, as President Obama will need to identify at least some budget cuts after signing the new stimulus bill. Weapons programs that have suffered significant cost overruns are amongst the most likely to be affected, according to Mr.Shanker.

Although supplemental funding for weapons procurement and R&D is expected to decrease going forward, there is normally a lag between defense funding and the actual delivery of the purchased equipment. The Aerospace Industries Association estimates that since new procurement spending is basically committed for fiscal year 2009, and the new administration will have limited impact on fiscal year 2010, aerospace companies should see defense sales growth continue on-pace through calendar year 2012.

Whether the expected negative impact for the overall industry would come sooner or later, the key would be to identify which companies within it are relatively overvalued and most likely to suffer a severe price correction, and which have low market expectations embedded in their current stock price, thus being under lower pressure for meeting and beating analysts performance benchmarks.

Listed below are the companies from the Defense Industry according to AFG sector industry classification. Accompanying each stock, are its respective market cap, P/B, forward P/E, and sales growth expectations priced into the stock utilizing AFG’s Value Expectation application (assuming their 5-yr median EBITDA margins and asset turnover levels remain constant in the next 5 years).

 

Defense Companies and Their Implied Sales Growth Expectations:

*data date 2/18/09