MSFT

A focus list of buys and sells for our readers to use as a starting point when looking to make changes to portfolio. This list contains attractive and unattractive stocks from every major sector excluding financials. AFG's buy and sell lists have proven through time to provide a significant spread between the buys and sells helping you to identify winners and avoid potential torpedoes.

Twice in 2009, ValueExpectations.com highlighted “Fidelity’s Low Priced Stock Fund”, an investment strategy that has been employed since 1989 by fund manager Joel Tillinghast. The theory behind this “low-price” strategy is that stocks within the small cap space tend to experience the most frequent mis-pricings and have the least amount of analyst coverage. Mr. Tillinghast created this strategy to take advantage of the numerous inefficiencies in small caps. They started out as a strategy to invest in stocks trading below $10; that limit has since been raised to $35 to widen the pool of investable stocks. Since the prior 2 stock lists that we previously provided have outperformed, we will once again provide our readers a list of 30 attractive stocks under $35.

A highlight of the overall attractiveness of the Technology sector which currently looks to be trading at a discount to its historical relative valuation and looks undervalued relative to the market. The Tech sector also has consistently been voted the best sector to invest in over the next year by participants in our monthly survey of professional investors called The Market Forecast Project.

The list of most actively traded stocks in the S&P 500 seems to attract the most attention amongst the investment community and always create a good amount of “Buzz”. We decided to take the list of the most actively traded stocks over the last 50 trading days (excluding financials) and run them through The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) meat grinder to see which are worthy of the hype and are attractive investment opportunities and which you should probably stay away from.

AFG uses a set of criteria in its stock selection process that has proven successful at identifying winners and losers in the market including its proprietary measure of corporate performance (Economic Margin), valuation, management quality and earnings quality among other criteria. Of the companies listed that are heavily traded, AFG believes the companies with expected improvement in Economic Margins, attractive valuations, and a wealth creating management team are the companies that will be the most likely to outperform the market and their sector peers. (register now to receive exclusive buy ideas- it's fast and free!)

Ticker  Name Sector AFG Recommendation (NYSE:PFE)  PFIZER INC Health Attractive (NYSE:S)  SPRINT NEXTEL CORP Technology Attractive (NYSE:VZ) VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS Technology Attractive (NASDAQ:ORCL)  ORACLE CORP Technology Attractive (NASDAQ:DTV) DIRECTV GROUP INC (THE) Consumer Services Attractive (NYSE:Q)  QWEST CMMNCTNS INTL INC Technology Attractive (NYSE:DYN)  DYNEGY INC A Energy and Extraction Attractive (NASDAQ:EBAY) EBAY INC Consumer Services Attractive (NYSE:CHK) CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORP Energy and Extraction Attractive (NYSE:WMT) WAL-MART STORES INC Consumer Services Attractive (NYSE:CVS) CVS CAREMARK CORP Consumer Services Attractive (NASDAQ:MSFT) MICROSOFT CORP Technology Attractive (NASDAQ:CSCO) CISCO SYSTEMS INC Technology Attractive (NYSE:BSX)  BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP Health Neutral (NYSE:TXN) TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC Technology Neutral (NYSE:LOW) LOWE'S COMPANIES INC Consumer Services Neutral (NASDAQ:CMCSA) COMCAST CORP CL A Consumer Services Neutral (NYSE:MU)  MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC Technology Neutral (NYSE:XRX) XEROX CORP Consumer Durable Neutral (NASDAQ:DELL) DELL INC Technology Neutral (NYSE:EMC) EMC CORP Technology Neutral (NYSE:XOM) EXXON MOBIL CORP Energy and Extraction Neutral (NASDAQ:INTC) INTEL CORP Technology Neutral (NASDAQ:NVDA) NVIDIA CORP Technology Neutral (NASDAQ:YHOO) YAHOO! INC Miscellaneous Neutral (NYSE:MOT)  MOTOROLA INC Technology Neutral (NASDAQ:NWSA)  NEWS CORP A Consumer Services Neutral (NYSE:AMD)  ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES Technology Neutral (NASDAQ:AAPL) APPLE INC Technology Neutral (NYSE:MO) ALTRIA GROUP INC Consumer Non Durable Neutral (NASDAQ:QCOM) QUALCOMM INC Technology Neutral (NASDAQ:AMAT) APPLIED MATERIALS INC Technology Unattractive (NYSE:AA) ALCOA INC Basic Material Unattractive (NYSE:T) AT&T INC Technology Unattractive (NYSE:HAL) HALLIBURTON CO Capital Goods Unattractive

The rankings above were provided using AFG’s research product AFGView.com and are ranked based on AFG’s overall investment opportunity signal, valuation signal and expected changes in Economic Margins. The companies must rank as attractive or unattractive in all 3 categories or the firm is listed as neutral.

Below is a brief description of those variables with informative links.

Source: EconomicMargin.com

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.

+View our List of Value Expepectations Recommended Articles

AFG Recommendation Performance
9/1998 – 5/2009
Annualized Returns

Source: AFGView client databases from 9/1998 – 5/2009
Universe size: 4,000 to 5,500 firms

The Applied Finance Group (AFG) is an independent equity research provider that has partnered with CEO Magazine in recent years to give investors insight into which CEOs do the best job of creating value for its shareholders; after all, that is what they are hired for. The AFG/CEO Wealth Creation Index, which relies upon AFG’s corporate performance metric Economic Margin (EM), provides a better understanding of wealth creation than traditional accounting measures such as EPS and ROC. The link below will take you to the complete list of rankings of CEOs from S&P 500 companies that have held their current position for at least 3 years, based on their wealth creation abilities. Topping the rankings in 2009 is MasterCard’s Robert W. Selander, up from third place last year. Both Selander and runner-up Federated Investors’ J. Christopher Donahue run very high EM companies (24.5 percent and 20.6 percent three-year averages, respectively). Interestingly, both have been able to improve in a bad economy.

As a further layer of analysis, we have taken the companies of the top 10 CEOs and ranked them based on Valuation Attractiveness to give insights into which companies on the list look the most attractive as potential investment opportunities. Even good companies with strong leadership do not always make good investments, because it depends on what you pay for them. The companies on the list that look unattractive from a valuation standpoint are the companies we recommend reviewing in greater detail before you consider adding to any portfolio.

Since 1996, through back-tests and model portfolio results, AFG has proven to be successful at identifying winners and losers in the market by utilizing its Economic Margin methodology (understanding a company’s true economic profitability), and valuation techniques as seen in the Buy/Sell spread (provided below).

Rank within Sector Ticker Name Sector Valuation Signal Top 10 S&P 500 CEO's  (NYSE:MA)  MASTERCARD INC CL A Consumer Services Attractive (NASDAQ:GILD)  GILEAD SCIENCES INC Health Attractive (NYSE:STZ) CONSTELLATION BRANDS INC Consumer Non Durable Attractive (NYSE:LO) LORILLARD INC Consumer Non Durable Attractive (NYSE:MON) MONSANTO CO Basic Material Fair (NASDAQ:CHRW)  C.H. ROBINSON WORLDWIDE Transportation Fair (NASDAQ:MSFT) MICROSOFT CORP Technology Fair (NYSE:FII)  FEDERATED INVESTORS B Financials Unattractive (NASDAQ:AMZN)  AMAZON.COM INC Consumer Services Unattractive (NYSE:ECL) ECOLAB INC Consumer Non Durable Unattractive

 

AFG Recommendation Performance
9/1998 – 5/2009
Annualized Returns

 

Source: AFGView client databases from 9/1998 – 5/2009
Universe size: 4,000 to 5,500 firms

What is the most attractive sector? That's one of the questions we asked a group of professional investors in our Market Forecast Project. The answer varied from person to person, but there was a general consensus.  The majority was in favor of Technology, which pulled away by far with 41 of a possible 98 first place votes. Survey participants were asked to rank a list of sectors from 1-11 in order of how attractive they found that sector to be over the next 12 months. Technology ranked highest with an average ranking of 2.7, well ahead of the rest; Basic Material placed second with an average rank of 4.8. We've put together a list below of both attractive and unattractive companies within the Technology sector.  It may be worthwhile to take a closer look at the companies listed. If the insight provided by the survey’s investment professionals holds true, you could be among those who outperform the market.

Market Forecast Sector Ranking Results
15. Rank Order, which sector seems most attractive to you over the next 12 months?
(1 = Most attractive)

Results Have Been Ranked by Most Attractive

                                                                                              1 Technology
                                                                                              2 Basic material
                                                                                              3 Energy & extraction 
                                                                                              4 Health
                                                                                              5 Capital goods 
                                                                                              6 Consumer non-durable 
                                                                                              7 Financials
                                                                                              8 Consumer services 
                                                                                              9 Consumer durable
                                                                                              10 Transportation
                                                                                              11 Utilities

10 Attractive Technology Stocks


10 Unattractive Technology Stocks

 

AFG's Buy/Sell Criteria - factors 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 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).

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

On Monday we highlighted several companies from our buy/sell list that represented investment ideas for all types of investors, which included Small and Large Cap stocks as well as Growth and Value stocks. Since Value Expectations tends to provide Large Cap Value Stocks for potential Buy ideas, earlier this week we decided it would be helpful to also highlight some small cap stocks we like from the Russell 2000. Now, moving on to the Growth investor, we will focus on companies we classify as growth stocks and find attractive within the S&P 500 (excluding Financials). By definition, AFG classifies growth stocks as companies with a Market Value/Invested Capital (MV/IC) in the top half of their sector.

 

In the table below are 10 growth stocks that we find attractive based on AFG’s valuation model, and are ranked neutral or higher based on AFG’s default recommendation.

 

Attractive Growth Companies - S&P 500 (excluding Financials)

 

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 Growth Universe - Companies in the AFG universe, which have MV/IC in the top 50% of the universe and have EPS estimates.

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

Every year Fortune releases a list of the 40 best companies to invest in now to retire on. This long-term portfolio is designed to protect your hard-earned nest-egg as you approach retirement.

Last year Fortune’s portfolio of 40 best stocks to retire on returned -23.07% from 6-20-08 to 6-16-09, relative to the -30.8% returned by the S&P500 during the same time period. This year they are replacing 23 stocks to form the new portfolio.

Provided below are the 40 stocks recommended by Fortune as the best stocks to retire on in 2009 and our outlook of these companies from a valuation perspective based on The Applied Finance Group’s valuation model.

 Fortune's 40 Best Stocks to Retire On - 2009

Related Stock Article:
Is Apple a Buy Hold or Sell?, Click Here to View

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!

In our May 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 AFG Technology 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). Listed are the 10 most attractive and 10 least attractive companies in the AFG Technology sector that are within the S&P 500. Also listed below the graph is an explanation of AFG’s Relative Valuation Chart.

Technology Sector Relative Valuation Chart

Relative Valuation 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 Technology 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.

 

Top/Bottom 10 Companies In AFG Tech Sector Ranked by Valuation Attractiveness (within S&P 500)

 

Note: Telecommunications companies are included in the AFG Technology Sector

Here is a sample report from our AFG 50 model portfolio.  The AFG 50 model portfolio provides institutional investment firms access to a devoted research team and investment process with the specific goal of consistently beating the S&P 500.   The AFG 50 leverages our client’s investment process and enables them to focus on their core strengths.  Below is a sample equity research report updating our thoughts on MSFT:

MSFT Investment Summary: Microsoft struggled again this quarter, but still delivered total EPS figures in line with Wall Street’s expectations. Net earnings were $2.98 billion, or $0.33 per diluted share, down 32% from $4.39 billion, or $0.47 per diluted share a year ago Excluding severance charges and investment write- downs, the company would have earned $0.39 per share during the quarter. Total revenues decreased for the first time y-o-y in the company’s history, down 6% to $13.65 billion from $14.45 billion in Q308. Analysts were expecting diluted EPS of $0.39 on total revenues of $14.1 billion. Management did not give specific guidance for Q409, but did say that it expects weakness in its markets to continue at least through the next quarter. The company’s third quarter revenues were negatively impacted by weakness in the global PC and server markets, somewhat offset by stability from enterprise customers and the annuity portion of the business. Client revenues decreased 16% to $3.40 billion in the quarter, as OEM revenue dropped 19% due to weakness in the PC market. Server and Tools revenues increased 7%, driven by double-digit growth in the enterprise annuity business from sales of premium editions of Windows Server 2008 and SQL Server 2008.  Click here to view complete sample client report on MSFT

Professional Money Managers, click here to register for a free trial of our AFG 50 Model Portfolio.

 

Fortune released a list of 40 companies in June 2008 that they labeled as the 40 best stocks to retire on. Although ValueExpectations.com’s research is focused on long-term investing, we believe reviewing companies on a ongoing basis helps to avoid potential pitfalls with bad investments and allows one to take advantage of companies that might be mispriced. For this reason we have ranked all companies in the Fortune 40 portfolio based on Valuation Attractiveness.

Good companies don’t always make good investments! If you believe this is a list of quality companies then that is a wonderful start. But understanding what you are paying for those companies is equally important. Few would argue that Mercedes Benz produces an excellent engineered vehicle and a quality product. However, if that Mercedes Benz cost $1,000,000, it may be a great vehicle, but not necessarily a good price.

As a review of the performance of this list since release, Fortune’s portfolio has returned an average of -28.64% since its release which is about 6.3% spread above what the S&P 500 delivered on average during the same time period. Although this portfolio did outperform the S&P 500, had you invested in these 40 companies in equal parts on the date of release, your $100,000 retirement nest egg would now be worth somewhere around $70,000.

Fortune 40 Companies To Retire On

 

AFG's Valuation Model – Using AFG’s modified discounted cash flow model to measure the intrinsic value of a firm compared to its peers.

Tickersense.com has recently published an article highlighting 15 companies that have been the leaders of the market since the low on November 20, 2008. Made up mostly of Tech stocks (8 of 15), this list of companies has been responsible for about half of the total change of the S&P500 since November 20, and the author believes it is a good place to start if you are “looking for leadership”. Below is a table highlighting the price performance of 12 of the 15 companies (Financials were excluded as well as WYE and SGP due to takeovers).

A second table provides an analysis of the valuation attractiveness of these companies as well as the market expectations for sales growth implied in the stock’s current price using AFG’s Value Expectations interface. 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.

 

 Performance From November 20, 2008 to Yesterday's Close

 

Valuation Attractiveness & Implied Sales Growth Expectations

 

*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 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 the list of companies assuming their EBITDA Margins and Asset Turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.

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.