LIFE

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.

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.

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.

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.

Earlier in the week we highlighted the most attractive style and sector universes from our Monthly Market Review. As a follow up to that article we are providing a list of the 10 most undervalued stocks in the S&P500. All companies listed met The Applied Finance Group's (AFG's) Buy screen (criteria explained below) and are in the bottom half of their sector in Market Value/Invested Capital (MV/IC) which by definition qualifies the companies as part of the AFG Value Universe.

 10 Most Undervalued Stocks In The S&P500

When identifying buy ideas AFG looks for companies with the most valuation upside compared to their sector peers, above sector median expected Economic Margin change, and a management quality score that reflects a management team following a wealth creating strategy.

A brief description of AFG'sbuy 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 it's peers.

Management Quality – Assess management’s ability to make wealth creating decisions.

Value Universe: Companies in the AFG universe, which have MVIC at the bottom 50% of the
universe and have EPS estimates.

Market Value/Invested Capital - The firm's average total equity, debt and other obligations divided by net invested capital

*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.

Recent Market Review:  Obama, the Budget and the “Un” Stimulus package

AFG Market Forecast Project
Insights From
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

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.