GCI

The Oracle of Omaha Warren Buffett is generally viewed as the most respected and successful investor in history, and many of our value-oriented readers follow the movements and purchases of Buffett rather closely and for good reason. Berkshire Hathaway, a conglomerate holding company, which Buffett built from a textile company into a major corporation, has averaged a 20.3% compounded annual gain in per-share book value from 1965-2008. There is no doubt about the success Buffett has achieved over the years, and there has even been a recent study done that shows an investor could have earned over 14% returns a year had they purchased each Buffett stock, a month after his investment company disclosed ownership.

We thought it would be an interesting story to show how Buffett’s holdings would rank according to The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) valuation model and Economic Margin Methodology. The companies we believe look the most attractive and that investors should pay the most attention to when searching for long investment opportunities are the companies that have both an attractive default AFG valuation and are expected to improve their Economic Margins at a greater rate than their sector peers.

AFG's track record of identifying winners and losers has proven that companies AFG identifies as undervalued are more likely to outperform, than those AFG ranks as overvalued, and the same holds true for companies with expected improvements in EMs vs. expected declines. The Economic Margin methodology adjusts for common distortions in GAAP accounting practices and helps investors to understand the true economic profitability a company earns above its cost of capital. By understanding the true economic profitability a company earns and by gaining a firm grasp on the expectations embedded in security prices, investors can come to a more refined intrinsic value for a company and thus put themselves in a better position to outperform.

Below is a list of Berkshire Hathaway’s current holdings (excluding Financials) ranked by valuation attractiveness, and followed by expected change in economic margins.

Other Popular Articles: 

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.

On March 9th 2009, the S&P 500 hit its low mark of the year of 666.79. Since March the market has rallied up to 1,068.78 as of the close on September 16, 2009 and we thought it timely to analyze the companies that have made the biggest gains and losses since the low and provide some insights on how we view the 10 biggest gainers and losers in the index going forward. All of the biggest movers have been ranked based on attractiveness according to The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) investment criteria and valuation model. The companies with the most attractive valuations and positive Economic Margin (AFG’s measure of corporate performance) movement have proven to be more likely to outperform those companies that look unattractive according to AFG investment criteria and that look expensive within AFG’s valuation model.

The list below contains the companies that have experienced the biggest price movements in the S&P 500 since the March 9th low and how each of these companies measure up going forward, according to AFG’s investment criteria and valuation model. Companies that look attractive according to AFG’s valuation model along with improving Economic Margins have proven through vigorous back-tests to identify the company’s most likely to outperform their benchmark.

Other Popular Articles: 

When analysts and market pundits come on tv to talk about stock picks, they usually talk about the "P/E" ratio (Price to Earnings) being attractive.  However if you're investing in stocks and you only look at the "P/E" ratio, you might be walking into a "Value Trap".  Investors ignore half the valuation picture when investors only concentrate on P/E as investors also need to consider the growth potential of the company and what investments are needed to get the earnings.  The Applied Finance Group (AFG) has developed a process that incorporates these factors easily into the valuation framework.  Using AFG’s Valuation Metric, we have compiled a list of 20 companies with low P/E, 10 of which we consider attractive investments, and 10 of which we consider Value Traps.

By using AFG's Economic Margin framework instead of earnings alone, investors capture the true net cash flow the entire firm is generating. It is not uncommon for companies to grow P/E while having declining EM’s. This occurs when the cost for the investment required to yield the increasing P/E is more than the cash flow generated from the investment. By analyzing a company’s EMs through time, investors gain a more accurate account of levels and changes in a company’s current profitability and value.

If earnings are a true proxy for performance, there should be a correlation between a company growing earnings and its price to earnings ratio. As a surprise to many investors, there is actually little to no correlation between earnings growth and price to earnings ratios (see chart below).
 

P/E is determined by taking a stock’s price and dividing it by the last four quarter’s worth of earnings. P/E alone should not be used to value companies. P/E does not look at a company’s balance sheet thus we do not know what the costs of generating those earnings. While the P/E is determined by looking at a company’s past performance, EM bases a company’s value off its future projections. By using EM, an investor can know how their stocks are likely to perform, allowing them to clearly evaluate where to invest.

Successful companies measure results, make decisions and set strategy with the goal of creating value. A company’s performance measures must serve as a proxy for its market value creation. While important, S-T Earnings alone are a poor indicator of a company’s value, due to what they do not measure.
 

Economic Margin is a more complete performance measure for companies to use to guide performance and motivate employees. Executives consider Cash Flow, Investment, Competition & Risk when setting strategy. The above charts show that investors do the same.

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.

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

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.

Below is a chart and table outlining the 2009 year to date performance of the sectors within the S&P 500. The Technology sector has lead the way thus-far and the Financial and Utility sectors have been dragging down the overall index performance coming up on the halfway point of 2009. Along with sector performance we have also provided a table with the best and worst 10 performing stocks within the S&P 500 index so far this year.

It is nice to see that 2 of the top 10 performers in the S&P 500 index (S, FCX) are stocks that we have recommended on multiple occasions on ValueExpectations.com. VE.com recommended Sprint on 11/26/08 AFG Buys, 12/29/08 High Value Score, 3/13/09 10 Most Undervalued and Freeport Mc-Moran on 1/17/09 4 Stocks To Consider, 1/30/09 5 Cheap Stocks, 2/17/09 Digging Deep.

Average Sector Returns (S&P 500 YTD)

Average Sector Returns (S&P 500 YTD)

Best and Worst 10 Performing Companies YTD 2009 (S&P 500)

The Applied Finance Group

Bloomberg provides a score for companies within the S&P 500 based on an average of all analyst ratings from the street. Below is a table highlighting companies with the best analyst ratings, largest increase in rating, highest price targets, and worst analyst ratings and the valuation attractiveness of each of these companies based on The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG) valuation model.

Companies within each of these groups are ranked from most attractive from a valuation perspective to the least attractive. VE.com will actively track the performance of these recommendations and see how they stack up to the analyst recommendations in each group. AFGview.com, AFG’s professional investor website allows you to compare any company using their rating versus the consensus ratings of the sell side. If you are interested in an analysis on a specific company, contact afgsales@afgltd.com.

Best/Worst Analyst Rated Companies (Bloomberg)

AFG's 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.

With Berkshire Hathaway’s annual meeting just behind us, we thought it would be interesting to provide an analysis of the Oracle of Omaha’s companies (ex. Financials) to give you a better idea of their valuation attractiveness. The companies that rank highest on valuation should be more likely to outperform going forward and could represent an attractive investment opportunity.

Year to date Mr. Buffet’s portfolio has delivered an average return of 5.18% compared to the 12.93% delivered by the S&P 500 Index (as of May 8, 2009). In the future we will measure the performance of each of the three groups of stocks we now label as Attractive, Fairly Valued, and Unattractive, in order to see what type of spreads are achieved between them.

Berkshire Hathaway's Holdings (ex. Financials) Ranked By Valuation Attractiveness

If you want to learn more about AFG's Valuation methodology, click here.

As the first 100 days of the new administration have come and gone, portfolio managers and analysts are searching through the market to see which stocks, industries, and sectors will gain from new policy and which ones are potential torpedoes in their portfolio. In AFG’s Monthly Market Review we have highlighted some of the focus of the new administration and how it can affect decisions as an investor, and we continue to search through the market in the hope of identifying which companies warrant their performance and which ones look to be unattractive from a valuation standpoint. The companies within the Financial sector have moved for reasons other than valuation, and will not be evaluated from a valuation perspective but it is interesting to see which companies have done the best and worst given the recent market shift.

Below is a comparison of the performance of the market with the last four presidents - we understand that each president walked into a different economic environment, but it is interesting to see how each one faired their first 100 days. The key will be how the market does over the long haul, especially given the significant policy changes and challenges the markets face over the course of the next year.

S&P 500 Reactions to Obama's First 100 Days

Event Key Of Obama's First 100 Days

How Obama's First 100 Days Compare to Last 3 U.S. President's (S&P 500)

S&P 500 Companies With Best/Worst Returns During Obama's First 100 Days

Valuation Attractiveness of Top/Bottom 10 Companies in Obama's First 100 Days (Ex. Financials)

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.

Below is a look at the YTD returns, valuation attractiveness and sales growth expectations of the two biggest and smallest companies in each sector within the S&P 500 (excluding financials). This link provides some insight into Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) valuation techniques. Also compare the expectations for sales growth to what the companies have delivered historically to see which stocks on this list are most likely to meet or exceed those expectations, and thus be more likely to out-perform.

 Biggest/Smallest Companies (Mkt Cap) By Sector S&P 500 (excluding financials)

*AFG’s Value Expectation allows us to understand the imbedded Sales Growth, EBITDA Margins, and Asset Turnovers a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory and in normal circumstances, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The table displays the implied future sales growth of companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.

With the first quarter of 2009 winding down, ValueExpectations.com has compiled a list of the best and worst performing stocks thus far in 2009 (excluding financials). It is not surprising for us to see two companies on the top performer list (S and MYL) that also appeared on our list at the end of January, or three bottom performing companies (ODP, TXT and MTW) still remaining on the bottom performer list over a month and a half later. We published an article in early February highlighting the top and bottom performers for the month of January and posed the question “Is the January Effect effective?”

Top 10 S&P 500 Companies (YTD 2009)

Bottom 10 S&P 500 Companies (YTD 2009)

Our conclusion: Looking at the YTD returns for the companies in our January effect article's top and bottom lists, we notice that there is a huge spread. January’s top performers have earned an average return of 4.66% YTD compared to January’s bottom performers’ average YTD return of -57.15%. This pretty compelling spread suggests that the January effect may be something investors want to pay closer attention to next year and it may even be helpful for the remainder of 2009.

*AFG’s Value Expectation allows us to understand the imbedded Sales Growth, EBITDA Margins, and Asset Turnover a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory and in normal circumstances, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The table displays the implied future sales growth of companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnover stay constant at the company's historical 5 year median.

Below is Value Expectations’ analysis of the companies in the S&P 500 with the 10 best and 10 worst returns for 2009 YTD (excluding financial companies). Comparing the sales growth expectations priced in (VE sales growth) to what the company has delivered in sales growth historically allows us to see which firms have the most reasonable sales growth expectations implied by their current trading prices and thus are more likely to outperform. Will the companies with the best returns be able to maintain their momentum for the remainder of 2009? Will the companies with the worst returns be able to turn things around? We will track the S&P500 winners and losers in the year ahead and provide you with regular updates.

10 Worst S&P 500 Companies 2009 YTD

10 Best S&P 500 Companies 2009 YTD

*data as of close Feb. 20, 2009

*AFG’s Value Expectation allows us to understand the imbedded Sales Growth, EBITDA Margins, and Asset Turnovers a company has to deliver in the future to justify its current trading price. In theory and in normal circumstances, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The table displays the implied future sales growth of companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.

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 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!