





Value Expectations teaches professional investors how to make more informed investment decision evaluating stocks on the basis of corporate performance, valuation, management quality, earnings quality, and other proprietary variables. These variables inevitably help identify companies that are potential long-term investments while avoiding potential torpedoes. However, during the financial crisis, leverage and a week balance sheet played a significant part when investors evaluated a holding.
To help our institutional clients navigate the environment The Applied Finance Group (AFG) developed the risk analysis template specifically to model the healthiness of a company’s balance sheet. In addition to the risk analysis template we also developed a template that calculated an Altman Z-Score developed to identify companies that are most likely to go bankrupt.
As professional investors we often move on and like to forget the past concentrating on how to gain alpha in the future. However, not to forget the past we decided to post an update list in the S&P500 on companies that are financially healthy and are attractively priced using The Applied Finance Groups valuation model.
Provided below is a list of healthy Z-score companies within the S&P 500 that also look attractive based on The Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) investment criteria. All of the companies listed have an attractive valuation and are expected to improve their Economic Margins (AFG’s measure of what a company earns above its cost of capital) more than their sector peers. Companies expected to improve their Economic Margin’s (EMs) have proven to be more likely to outperform than companies with an expected decline in EMs.
Using AFG’s valuation model on AFGView.com, we identified a few 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.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
About 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.
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
Related Tickers: "NYSE:PCP"






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.






Listed below are the companies in the Energy & Extraction sector within the S&P 500 Index, ranked in order of valuation attractiveness. Currently, the Energy & Extraction sector has the highest median Value Score of all sectors according The Applied Finance Group’s April 2009 Monthly Market Review and looks to be trading at a significant discount relative to its historic valuation.


The graph above shows the median percentage upside for the Energy sector relative to the overall market across time. Values greater than 1 indicate the sector 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 Energy company is undervalued relative to the market currently and has been trading at a significant discount to its historic relative valuation, indicating a potentially attractive opportunity.






Below is a summary of 22 AFG Buy Recommendations from the S&P500 Index. The report highlights the 2 companies from each sector (ex. financials) that have the most attractive value score and are currently rated Buys by The Applied Finance Group, Ltd. (AFG). Factors used to derive a AFG’s recommendation include: Expected change in Economic Margins, Intrinsic Value, and Management Quality.
We also ran a VE analysis and provided the results. The VE analysis of each company is used to identify implied sales growth expectations versus what the company has delivered historically in sales growth over the past 5 years. 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.
Cheapest Companies In The S&P 500 By Sector (ex. Financials)

Click Here, to see results of our portfolio performance using AFG's Buy/Sell criteria
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.
Applied Finance Group’s (AFG’s) Value Score defined - 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.
VE Sales Growth - 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, if the imbedded future performance is very conservative relative to the company’s historical performance, the stock is regarded as undervalued. The VE Sales Growth displays the implied future Sales Growth of the company assuming their EBITDA Margins and Asset Turnovers stay at the 5 year historic median levels.






Economic Margin is a measure of economic profitability that identifies how much a company earns above or below its cost of capital. We analyzed all companies in the S&P500 Index based on their historical, current and forecasted Economic Margins to see which firms have the best average of past, present and future profitability. We identified the two most profitable and the two least profitable companies from each sector and have presented them in the table below. As a base of reference, the average firm in corporate America earns a 0 (zero) Economic Margin, or is a “break-even business”. Our research has shown that companies with consistently positive EMs that are also expected to increase their EMs in the future tend to outperfom firms with negative or declining EMs.
<!--[if gte mso 10]> Economic Margin is a corporate performance measure, which helps us identify well managed, wealth creating companies. Although not included in this post, we want to remind you that it is also important to understand the attractiveness of corporations' valuations to make sure we invest in great companies at great prices. (Here is an article by ValueExpectations.com explaining Applied Finance Group’s basic valuation concepts).
Note: Only companies in the S&P 500 were included.

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. more EM details (PDF)






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.







Kohl's Corp (KSS)
The Company operates family-oriented department stores that sell moderately priced apparel, footwear and accessories for women, men and children; soft home products such as sheets and pillows; and housewares.
Why We Like It
1. Sound and successfully executed strategy: Continuous expansion by building new stores; Continuous expansion of private or exclusive labels; Conservative inventory management; more efficient marketing.
2. Fared better than competition in 2008: Opened nearly 80 stores in 2008 or about 9% growth, comps down 7.7% ytd, EBITDA down 6%. Comps and earnings erosions are smaller than competition such as JCP and Macy’s. Not to mention Mervyns which is filing for liquidation.
3. Financial Strength: Doesn’t own credit card operation, therefore, no worries of credit loss. Has financial book debt of just $2 billion, EBIT / Int ratio is more than 10 times.
4. Going forward: In 2009, Kohl’s is going to continue to utilize its strong financial position to continue to open new stores and remodel existing stores to grow market share in a very difficult environment. The company has a very attractive valuation and our tgt price is $46, suggesting about 22% upside.
Value Expectations Analysis on KSS

Cvs Caremark Corp (CVS)
The Company is a provider of prescriptions and related healthcare services in the United States. It operates two business segments: Retail Pharmacy and Pharmacy Services.
Why We Like It
1. A juggernaut in providing healthcare services: CVS now has the largest retail pharmacy, and the 2nd largest PBM business in the US. Great potential to bring more convenient pharmaceutical benefits to consumers, at lower cost, by integrating mail delivery, internet, telephone, and walk in options.
2. Less volatile Demand: Drug retail is largely non discretionary, aging population, higher use of drugs for preventive measures, and the proliferation of new pharmaceutical products.
3. Good execution:
* CVS always won the battles related to acquisition targets against other suitors and has always delivered promised synergies from those acquisitions. They are consistent enablers of acquired assets.
* Ytd, front store comps growth has been positive and EBITDA margins have grown consistently from the year ago periods too.
4. Overall: Buying a sophisticated leader of an industry with stable demand at a great price.
Value Expectations Analysis on CVS

Valero Energy Corp (VLO)
An independent refining and marketing company that owns and operates 17 refineries in the United States, Canada, and Aruba. It produces conventional gasolines, distillates, jet fuel, asphalt, petrochemicals, lubricants etc.
Why We Like It
1. Margins for diesel are more favorable than gasoline, since diesel (retail price) is currently selling about 33% higher than gasoline. VLO’s distillate production, which includes diesel, jet fuel and heating oil, rose to 35% of overall production in first nine months of 2008, up from 33% last year.
2. The market has priced in more than 40% sales decline long-term, but we believe that VLO can do better than that.
3. Gasoline demand is down 2.2% from a year ago at 9 million barrels per day. However, it is difficult to believe that a 2% dip in demand would translate into a P/E multiple of only 5.3 (ttm) or EV/EBITDA of 3.2 (ttm).
Value Expectations Analysis on VLO

Freeport-Mcmoran C & G (FCX)
The Company is engaged in the copper, gold and molybdenum mining through its majority-owned subsidiary, PT Freeport Indonesia.
Why We Like It
1. Market is pricing in about 40% long-term sales decline, so there’s been overselling in the stock because we think that FCX can do better than that.
2. One year following the prior recession in 2001, FCX outperformed the S&P 500 Index by 44%.
3. FCX is responding to reduced demand by cutting back production, suspending its $2 per share a year dividend, and delaying spending on expansion projects. The market has rewarded the company’s moves recently, pushing up shares about 20% over the past 5 trading days.
Value Expectations Analysis on FCX







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: Invesment Insights by The Applied Finance Group
Copyright 2010 | The Applied Finance Group | Contact US



