VMC

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.

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.

All Energy Companies (S&P 500) Ranked By Valuation Attractiveness

Energy Sector - Relative Valuation Chart

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.

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.

The Applied Finance Group (AFG) works with some of the most well respected investment firms in the U.S. to help them develop quantitative screening processes to identify a better fishing pond of companies to choose from for their portfolio holdings. However, picking winning investment opportunities isn’t the only value add AFG provides clients. They also develop quantitative strategies to quickly identify possible torpedoes lurking in your client or prospective client’s portfolio.

AFG’s quantitative process is centered on their proprietary Economic Margin Framework. The core of AFG’s quantitative process starts with evaluating corporate performance and the expected improvement relative to their peers, evaluating the valuation attractiveness of the company, and determining if a firm is following a wealth creating or wealth destroying strategy.

A brief description of those variables are 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 their peers.

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

When identifying torpedoes AFG looks for companies with the least valuation upside compared to their sector peers, below sector median expected Economic Margin change, and a management quality score that reflects a management team following a wealth destroying strategy.

These 16 S&P 500 companies are potential torpedoes that could be lurking in your portfolio. These companies all possess characteristics that make for a bad investment opportunity. If you own one of these companies and would like a more in-depth explanation of why they are considered a potential torpedo, please email support@afgltd.com.

S&P 500 Potential Torpedoes

*AFG’s Value Expectation interface 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 above table displays the implied future sales growth of these mining companies assuming their EBITDA margins and Asset turnovers stay at the 5 year median levels.

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

16 Potential Torpedoes - That Could Be Lurking In Your Portfolio

AFG recommendations are ranked and have consistently identified winners and losers, therefore, this list of potential torpedoes should be given a second look if you own them or are considering adding them to your portfolio as they have characteristics that AFG has proven to be more likely to under-perform.