ValueExpectations.com emphasizes evaluating a company’s ability to earn a spread above their cost of capital using a very robust measure of corporate performance, Economic Margin. After evaluating a firm’s ability to create wealth VE.com then determines what price we are paying for the company using a modified discounted cash flow model. If we had to simplify performance, a very elementary way to evaluate performance can be Return on Invested Capital ROIC and valuation which can be simplified by using earnings yield. This is the approach Joel Grenblatt uses in his book, The Little Blue Book that Beats the Market.
In January VE.com highlighted a list of stocks based on Joel Greenblatt’s Magic Formula Investing Strategy from 1998-2004 Greenblatt’s simulated returns were 30.8% a year, relative to a 12.4% annual return for the S&P 500 and was only down in one year in that time-span.
In our article posted on January 9, 2009 we listed our best 30 “Magic Formula” companies which has earned returns comparable to the tests conducted by Mr. Greenblatt. From Jan. 9, 2009 to Dec. 14, 2009 the 30 companies we recommended from our “Magic Screen” have returned a solid 32.06% spread above the S&P 500. Since our last “Magic Formula” portfolio was successful we have decided to run the screen again for a new list of companies to see just how consistent this strategy is.
A look at Greenblatt’s formula for successful “Magic Formula Investing”:
1. Establish a minimum market capitalization (usually greater than $50 million).
2. Exclude utility and financial stocks
3. Exclude foreign companies (American Depositary Receipts)
4. Determine company's earnings yield = EBIT / enterprise value.
5. Determine company's return on capital = EBIT / (Net fixed assets + working capital)
6. Rank all companies above chosen market capitalization by highest earnings yield and highest return on capital (ranked as percentages).
7. Invest in 20-30 highest ranked companies, accumulating 2-3 positions per month over a 12-month period.
8. Re-balance portfolio once per year, selling losers one week before the year-mark and winners one week after the year mark.
9. Continue over long-term (3-5 year) period.
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 and then hold on to them for one year. 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.
|
About the AFG Screener
Professional investors have many ways to screen and narrow their list of constituents to create a focus list of companies they use to select from to develop their portfolios. In the industry, there are many screeners that are part of subscriptions to databases and investment tools, however, many of them do not provide guidance on the best screening methods to use. Created by The Applied Finance Group (AFG), the AFG Screener tool is a web-based company-screening application located on AFGView.com that is designed to save you time when narrowing your list of constituents. More importantly, AFG’s screener allows you to use proprietary variables that have been proven to outperform, helping investors make better investment decisions.
AFG’s Screener allows clients to find aggregate groups of companies that meet specific criteria from AFG’s entire global universe of over 14,000 securities. Using the Screener, one can find a list of companies that either match one of AFG’s preset screens or one based on a customized screen that you create.
The AFG Screener identifies attractive valuations, strong management teams, corporate performance, and the quality of earnings of a company as well as all traditional financial variables,
Because AFG’s Screener is web-based, clients can gain access from anywhere that has an internet connection, convenience and ease of “one-click screening” with our default screens, various forms of result presentations, and compatibility with Microsoft Excel for further analysis.

How to Use AFG’s Screener
Access AFG custom built screens that many clients regularly utilize that include AFG’s proprietary Economic Margin (EM), valuation and management quality variables along with many others.
Build your own custom screens using any variables you are familiar with such as price multiples and other accounting information by themselves or coupled with powerful AFG variables with just a few clicks of the mouse.
Once you have narrowed your list of constituents to those companies that meet your specific criteria you can easily upload your new list into AFG’s valuation model to analyze each company in greater detail or see how they rank vs. their peers on key AFG variables.
Default / Custom Screens
Whenever a new user is introduced to AFG’s Screener, they are provided with two default screens – AFG’s Default Buy screen and AFG’s Default Sell screen. Using these screens, one can filter companies based on AFG’s buy/sell criteria.
However, the AFG Screener is very intuitive allowing clients to create their own screens based on custom criteria. There are countless combinations that can be used to create a custom screens, as there are over 600 variables to choose from. AFG’s Screener tool can be used to list companies based on Indexes, Sectors, Industries, and previously created Portfolios.
Using Excel / Further Research
AFG screens can also be accessed using AFG’s Excel add-in to combine results with other spreadsheets or to create a report for your investment team. Exporting your information will give you more freedom to read, organize and document your data as well as pull in other variables within AFG’s Excel add-in to easily rank order your list of companies based on the same variables available within the screener.
Example Screen:
Below is a list of 12 companies that resulted from a quick screen that sought to identify those companies within the S&P 500 with attractive valuations, market cap above $1 billion, expected to improve EMs greater than sector peers, and that have a current stock price of under $30. Improving EMS and an attractive default AFG valuation rank is a good place to start when looking for the companies most likely to outperform. This is just one simple example of the capabilities of using AFG’s screener tool to select a focused list of stocks that are the most likely to outperform and a list that is worthy of more time spent on due diligence on the companies that meet the specified criteria.

The Applied Finance Group would also like to invite professional investors to join AFG’s Market Forecast Project so you can better understand what your peers currently think about the market and cultivate the “wisdom of Crowds” into actionable investment ideas and themes.
Register to View Complete Market Review and Sector Analysis, it's FAST and FREE!
![]()






Understanding the amount of accruals a company has on its books and the quality of its reported earnings is especially important during earnings season, as poor earnings quality companies are more likely to have negative earnings surprises and underperform as a result. With so many companies reporting earnings this week, we wanted to share an analysis of their earnings quality based on The Applied Finance Group’s Earnings Quality score. AFG’s Earnings Quality variable is based on the concept of accruals and is an important indicator, which helps to differentiate between companies with poor and high quality of reported earnings. Watch out for firms with poor EQ score – make sure they are not trying to pad their sales numbers through channel stuffing, for example.

*Source: www.afgview.com
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.
• Low Accrual companies outperform high accrual companies
Here is a look at how well the Earnings Quality variable works when you split top half vs. bottom half in each sector/style universe.

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

• Other Liabilities declined in Q308, leading to high accruals – change in licensing agreement required immediate recognition of deferred revenue.
• Eastman Kodak (EK) subsequently missed earnings in Q408.
• EK’s stock dropped 29% on January 28th, when Q408 earnings were announced.
• EK has underperformed the S&P500 by almost 70% since January 28th.
source: www.economicmargin.com
With a major week of earnings right around the corner, we thought it would be useful to our readers to provide an analysis of the companies set to report in the first half of next week. This analysis contains a breakdown of each company's default recommendation according to AFG's Buy/Sell criteria, a look at their valuation attractiveness, and a look at the direction their Economic Margin's are expected to head in the upcoming year. The three companies that look the most attractive based on these criteria are Pfizer, Advanced Micro Devices and Boston Scientific.
A company's Economic Margin (EM) is a measurement of a their true earnings above or below their cost of capital. EM also corrects distortions caused by accounting policies to give a more accurate assessment of a company's real value. It is important to understand the direction a company's EM's are heading because, by knowing this, one can get a complete assessment of how profitable a company can be in the future. The EM Framework addresses profitability, competition, growth and cost of capital. When factoring in each of these variables, investors can fully assess a company's value.
Below is the list of companies reporting earnings in the first half of the upcoming week along with a closer look at Boston Scientific:

According to the chart below, BSX's intrinsic value is above its current stock price, which leads us to believe that Boston Scientific is undervalued right now.

According to the Wealth Creation chart below, BSX has shown a positive Economic Margin and is forecasted to improve that margin in the upcoming year.

Source: Www.EconomicMargin.com
AFG's Buy/Sell criteria factor in Economic Margin, Management Quality, and AFG's Valuation Metric. In order to determine Management Quality, AFG scores management on their growth decisions in accordance with the company’s ability to either create or destroy wealth. AFG's Valuation Metric measures a company's Percent to Target (the 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.
AFG's default valuation is a good place to start because it is a simple metric that gives a more accurate outlook on a company's value while correcting distortions.
- - - - - - - - - - -
AFG’s Intrinsic Value Chart identifies how far a stock’s intrinsic value (target price assuming immediate decay) deviates from its trading range, which helps you recognize potentially mispriced stocks and pursue long and short opportunities.
• The blue bars represent the high and low trading range for a stock for 1 year.
• The red dotted line represents AFG’s historical Intrinsic Value through time.
• When the red line (Intrinsic Value) is above the blue bars (trading range), the company looks to be undervalued.
• When the red line (Intrinsic Value) is below the blue bars (trading range), the company looks to be overvalued.
AFG’s Intrinsic Value Chart also contains a company’s Value Score (ranked valuation attractiveness), Economic Margin Change (expected increase/decrease in economic profitability), and Accuracy score (how well AFG’s default valuation has tracked the company).
Wealth Creation Report: displays a company’s Economic Margins (what a company earns above or below its cost of capital) through time as well as a projection of their expected future levels. The second graph shows how a company has grown their assets over time and also contains a projection of how they will grow their assets next year. AFG’s view on wealth creation starts by looking for profitable companies that are also growing their assets to make the most of that profitability.
Investment Insights from your peers, Professional Investors - The Applied Finance Group would like to invite professional investors to join AFG’s Market Forecast Project so you can better understand what your peers currently think about the market and cultivate the “wisdom of Crowds” into actionable investment ideas and themes.
Click here to learn more







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.










Back in February Valueexpectations.com released a blog highlighting Fidelity’s Low Priced Stock Fund that follows a strategy of only investing in stocks with a share price of under $35. In that blog we provided a list of 30 stocks that we thought were attractively priced according to The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG's) valuation model broken up into three price brackets: under $10, $10 to $20 and $20 to $35.
From Feb 5th 2009 to June 5th 2009 the 30 stocks recommended as a group outperformed the S&P 500 by an average of 36.5%, the 10 stocks under $10 outperformed by 57.1%, the $10 to $20 stocks outperformed by 40.1% and the $20 to $35 stocks outperformed by 12.5% respectedly.
Joel Tillinghast, the fund’s manager began this fund with a strategy of only investing in stocks under $10. Since this stragtegy began Fidelity has moved the stock price limit to $35 where it currently sits. Tillinghast believes that share price alone is not of importance but the lower priced, smaller-cap universe of stocks experiences the most frequent mispricing’s and also has the least amount of analyst coverage.
As an update to the prior blog on this strategy Valueexpectations.com provided a list of 30 stocks that we believe are attractively priced and do not fit AFG's default sell criteria. Each group is ranked based on valuation attractiveness. AFG's analysis begins and ends with valuation, however along the way there are other key factors AFG considers when looking for buy opportunities: expected Economic Margin improvement, management quality, earnings quality.







The Halloween Indicator in the stock market sometimes defined as “sell in May and go away” is a strategy that is based on the difference in the performance of the market during May to October vs. November to April. The strategy is to invest in the S&P 500 during “the best 6 months” and switch to bonds during “the worst 6 months” to avoid the summer doldrums of small to negative returns. Since January of 1950 the average returns for November to April “good months” is 7.9% compared to the 2.5% average return delivered from May to October ‘bad months”.
Although there is a significant spread in returns between the good and bad months, does this mean you should convert to bonds and go on a vacation until September? There are several views for and against market timing but we feel it is too difficult to identify when to be out and when to be in the market. If you dig deeper into the market performance since 1950, you will find that 20 good and 20 bad months make up a significant part of the market performance. For more information read the following market timing strategy filled with pitfalls.
The market has been up in those worst 6 months 60% of the time since 1989, not as profitable as the best 6 months but still positive. I believe 2009 is a good lesson for many, with all of the inefficiencies and irregularities in today’s market, the mixed macro economic reports, and the belief we are headed toward a recovery, jumping out of the market could mean missing out on making up for some of the losses the market handed us in 2008
However, being invested isn’t enough, identifying quality companies and a good value will put you in an even better position to outpace the general market. Listed below are companies that should be considered as potential investment opportunities. These companies all have a valuation attractiveness near the top of their sector in addition to expected improvement of profitability (Economic Margin) above their sector, and do not follow a wealth destroying strategy defined by AFG’s management quality score.

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.
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.

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.






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.







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.







The companies on the top list are ten S&P 500 companies that have seen the best performance in the month of January over the past 5 years. Will these companies be able continue their hot streak in the month of January in 2009? Look for companies on the list that have low expectations for sales growth priced-in to justify their current stock price (VE Sales Growth) compared to what the firm has delivered in revenue growth over the last 5 years (5 Year Median Sales Growth). Companies with low expectations compared to what they have been able to deliver are the companies most likely to out-perform. Consistent returns in January coupled with low sales expectations are the companies you may want to look at as a possible investment.
The bottom list is the worst ten companies in median returns in the month of January over the past 5 years within the S&P 500. You may want to avoid the companies that have experienced tough times in January that also have high sales growth expectations compared to what they have been able to deliver the last 5 years.








![]()
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.
Here is a list of companies, two from each sector within the S&P 500 that are expected to improve their Economic Margins (EM) the most over the next two years along with the bottom two in each sector expected to have their EM’s deteriorate the most. Companies expected to improve their EM’s more than their sector peers have proven to be more likely to out-perform. Improving EM’s coupled with low expectations priced-in for sales growth are the companies on this list that may be worth a look as a potential investment.
Also included in this table is the implied sales growth priced-in over the next five years in order to justify the stock’s current trading price compared with their achieved 5 Year Median Sales Growth. Ask the question are the expectations for sales growth realistic compared with what revenue growth the firm has delivered in the last five years.
If you would like to learn more about the Economic Margin methodology or Value Expectations feel free to contact an AFG representative to schedule a web-demo at support@afgltd.com.







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




