IR

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.

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

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.

ValueExpectations.com has continued to provide investment ideas to help our readers make better informed investment decisions which leads to outperformance. In addition to finding buy opportunities, VE.com also understands the importance of avoiding potential torpedo’s given the current market volatility.

ValueExpectations.com has compiled a list of potential torpedo stocks within the S&P 500 that all contain several characteristics that AFG finds unattractive when searching for potential investment ideas. If one of these firms is a portfolio holding we recommend careful evaluation as they could all be torpedo’s.

The 15 firms listed below all meet AFG’s Strong Sell Criteria. In addition, these companies are all projected to earn less than their cost of capital which means they will earn a negative Economic Margin and all of these companies have a Z-Score (Altman Z-Score) in the at-risk range or risk of bankruptcy in the next 2 years. For a review of your current holdings using AFG’s research tools CLICK HERE FOR A FREE TRIAL.

S&P 500 - Potential Torpedoes (ex. Financials)

AFG Sell Criteria: When identifying possible sell/short opportunities (torpedoes) The Applied Finance Group (AFG) starts by running a screen using its proprietary Sell Criteria variables starting with Economic Margin. Economic Margin is a measure of corporate performance that identifies how profitable a company is by measuring how much the company earns above or below its cost of capital. In addition to corporate performance, AFG looks to identify those companies that are unattractively priced using our valuation model. Lastly AFG evaluates how well companies run their business using its Management Quality score, identifying companies that have management teams that destroy wealth.

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.

The Altman Z-score - 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

AFG has a solid track record of identifying winners and losers in the market, check our buy/sell spreads since 1998.

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.

By using The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG's) Risk Analysis, we have identified the top and bottom two firms in each sector (excluding the Financial sector) according to an overall risk score based on 9 variables (see more detail below). In addition to the risk analysis variables we also added another layer of analysis by evaluating the companies’ Earnings Quality (based on the concept of Accruals) and Altman Z-Score (identifies firms that are at risk of going bankrupt in the next 2 years).

Applied Finance Group’s Risk Analysis is designed to systematically calculate a stock’s risk score based on fundamental relationships between the Quarterly Income Statements and Balance Sheets. The template measures 9 factors to determine Risk: Changes in A/R, Changes in Inventories, Cash Flow vs. Operating Cash Flow, Fixed Payments vs. Pre-Tax Cash Flow, Leverage, Intangibles, Write-offs, Management Quality, and Valuation. Companies with lower scores have less risk. Companies in the Financial Sector were excluded due to their differences in financial statement structure.
 

1. Receivables to Sales - Delta – takes the difference in the median A/R to Sales ratio over the last 4 quarters vs. median 4 quarters before that.

2. Inventories to Sales - Delta – takes the difference in the median Inventories to Sales ratio over the last 4 quarters vs. median 4 quarters before that.

3. AFG’s Cash Flow-Oper. vs. Operating Cash Flow - AFG's Cash Flow-Oper. for a company is net cash that is generated by the continuing and discontinuing operations of the firm. We compare it to the company's Operating Cash Flow to assess its ability to pay its debt.

4. Fixed Payments vs. Pre-tax Payments Cash Flow – This ratio assesses the company’s ability to cover long-term obligations. If the fixed pmts are greater than 50% of the pre-tax payments cash flow, there is chance that this company may not be able to meet its obligations. Obligations less than 30% of cash flow are considered safe.

5. Leverage – Book leverage and Market leverage are analyzed to give us information about the company’s leverage position. Best score is given to the companies with Book Leverage lower than 60%, and negative score to these with Book Leverage higher than 60% and Market Leverage greater than 0.9*Book Leverage.

6. Intangibles as a Percentage of Total Assets – With this score we try to filter through and reward the companies that have grown organically, rather than through acquisitions. Our research has shown that on average companies tend to overpay for acquisitions and thus are rarely a profitable investment. Companies with Intangibles less than 20% of Total Assets get the best score.

7. Write-offs – Shows the number of years with significant write-offs over the last 5 years.

8. Management Quality – Measures a company’s EM+1 and LFY Asset Growth and there is empirical evidence that companies with positive EMs that are able to grow their business tend to outperform companies with negative EMs who continue to invest into unprofitable business.

9. Value Score – Measures a company’s attractiveness from valuation perspective.

Most/Least Risky Firms By Sector S&P 500 (excluding financials)

If you are a professional investor and would like to learn more about this analysis as well as other useful valuation tools click here for a free trial subscription to The Applied Finance Group's research.

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:


 

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