Monday, March 12, 2012
Colgate
Starbucks
Starbucks median PE over the last 10 years is 36.1 and over the last 5 years it is 28.3. Thus from a PE view point - the price is not out of line esp. given sbux's opportunity in expanding internationally. For perspective SBUX market cap is 39 billion and MCD's market cap is 98.3 billion.
>On a discounted cash flow basis SBUX is over-valued.
On earning justified basis - sbux continues to deliver earnings - therefore justifying its valuation. It is however priced to perfection (but not outrageously so) and if there is a stumble the stock can quickly go down 10 to 20% (which would be a buy in opinion). As long as SBUX continues to deliver it will be chased by momentum investors. The stock could go up another 10 - 20% based on earnings justified momentum.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
The Procter & Gamble Company
Using p/e and p/s jusified earnings I come to a value around $75.00.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Meadwestvaco Cp (MWV)
MVW is trading at the higher end of the P/B and P/S bands.
Johnson & Johnson Inc.
JNJ is trading neat the lower bounds of its 10 year valuation bands.
Coca- Cola
Cisco
Discounted cash flow valuation of Cisco:
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Stern Advice: Are you saving too much for retirement? | Reuters
Stern Advice: Are you saving too much for retirement?
By Linda Stern
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Retirement planning almost always starts with one number: A guesstimate of the percentage of pre-retirement income you're expected to need after you retire. That's called the "replacement rate" and is often pegged by industry experts at around 80 percent of a household's earnings.
For example, a recent paper from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College titled "How much to save for a secure retirement," relies on that 80 percent figure. "Households with earnings of $50,000 and over needed about 80 percent of pre-retirement earnings to maintain the same level of consumption," writes Alicia Munnell, author of the study.
She goes on to say that high earners need to save extremely high percentages of their income -- as much as 77 percent for the 45-year-old just starting to save for retirement at age 62 -- to produce that 80 percent.
The concept underlying Munnell's paper, and a lot of other retirement planning advice, is that you can figure out how much you need to save once you have a number for that 80 percent replacement rate.
But there's reason to believe that oft-quoted 80 percent figure is wildly on the high side. That, in turn, makes the retirement calculations based upon it also wildly off. And that means if you're trying to save enough money to produce that 80 percent figure, you may be putting away too much, or skimping unnecessarily on the early years of retirement.
Now, some academics are taking aim at that rule of thumb. "It's a sometimes bizarre measure that could have absolutely nothing to do with your standard of living," said Bonnie-Jeanne MacDonald, an actuary who currently holds two fellowships, one at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and another with the North American Society of Actuaries.
In a recent paper underwritten by the actuaries group and co-authored with Kevin Moore from Statistics Canada, the Canadian government's official agency, she reported that traditional replacement rate calculations have so many limitations and fallacies that they shouldn't be counted on by workers trying to plan their retirement savings.
"For a financial adviser to say you will need 70 percent or 80 percent of your income, and here's how much you have to save, is not very helpful," MacDonald said in a recent interview.
That has big implications for workers who are now exhorted on a daily basis to save more and more, 'lest they run out of money in retirement. If you really don't need 70 percent or 80 percent of your last paycheck for the rest of your life, you don't have to save enough to produce that figure. And saving too much has its consequences, says MacDonald.
"It's not coming from nowhere; it means you're making big reductions in your standard of living before retirement to make your standard of living higher after retirement," she explains.
Here's how to get a better handle on those projections.
-- Do your own math. Pre-retirees should try to calculate those discredited rules of thumb and estimate their own retirement needs more specifically. Look at how much you're spending now, and see which costs you think will disappear when you retire, or during your retirement. For example, when will you pay off your mortgage and finish helping your kids pay for college? How much will you save in taxes once you're not working? Add in more for costs, such as health care, that could go up.
-- Look at the data. True spending patterns suggest your first years of retirement will be your most expensive. Consider these figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics' consumer expenditure survey for 2010:
The average household headed by someone age 45 to 54 spends 57,788 a year. Those years are typically the highest-earning, highest-spending years. Average expenditures for the 55-to-64 age group (which presumably includes workers as well as early retirees) are $50,900; 88 percent of the expenditures for the younger group. Heads-of-household aged 65 to 75 spent an average of $41,434 in 2010, or about 72 percent of the amount spent during those early prime-earning years. And households headed by those over 75? They only spent an average of $31,529, or 55 percent of their peak spending.
That means that even if you do need 80 percent, or more, in your first years of retirement, you will not need that forever. That changes the savings calculus.
-- You may be able to front-load your retirement spending. That's most likely what you would do anyway, because people in their first year of retirement often spend extra money on special trips, home repairs and new hobbies.
Another retirement rule of thumb says you should pull out only 4 percent of retirement savings in your first year if you want your money to last 30 years. So, if you've saved $500,000, you could withdraw $20,000, or $1,667 a month. But, if you're willing to curtail spending down the road, you could start with bigger withdrawals early, says Christopher Van Slyke, a money manager in Austin, Texas. He tells some of his newly retired clients they can start by pulling 5.5 percent or 6 percent out of their portfolios for a few years, as long as they understand that that rate isn't sustainable for three decades.
Of course, it may not have to be.
(The Personal Finance column appears weekly; Editing by Gunna Dickson)
(Linda Stern can be reached at linda.stern(at)thomsonreuters.com)
Diageo Plc
The company has very high return on equity (33.3%) and relatively high debt to equity (1.4). However because of very strong cash flow it is easily able carry the high debt load. The company has negative tangible book value.
DEO is trading above its median ten year p/e. p/b and p/s ratios.
DEO medpe,medps,medpb Interactive Chart
The DCF tool also suggests that DEO has still more to go esp. as emerging market growth continues and DEO has a strong presence in these markets.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Friedman Industries, FRD
FRD is a small cap stock which I just bought. It has no debt, dividend yield of 5% and y-y ebitda growth of >100%. Stock is trading just 15% over tangible book value. Book value has been compounding at ~9% pace over the last decade.
Wal-Mart
My DCF analysis is as given on the left. Please note I have used 2011 free cash flow (fcf). fcf has been growing at 8.9% over the last 5 years. I am projecting that this pace continues for the next 10 years and then falls to 4%.
I have used a discount rate of 8% with respect to WMT's consistency of earning and solid balance sheet.
This gives a fcf capitalized value of ~62. To this we should add the tangible book value ($15.3) to properly value WMT.
This would give us a final value of $77.42.
Now if wmt was to trade at a median price/earnings or price/sales multiple over 5 years we would get a value of between $64 to $72. This slightly below but consistent with the value derived above.
WMT medpe,medps Interactive Chart
Walmart is trading at just above historic 10 year multiple, as shown in the chart below.
Thus, I feel that WMT is undervalued and has a upside of 15% from current prices.
Also don't forget the earnings and fcf continues to grow like clockwork and WMT has paid a rising dividend. Current yeild is 2.4% with a payout ratio of 32%. Dividend has been rising at the rate of 15% per year and given the payout can keep on rising at faster level than earnings for at least a decade. This mean a share bought at current price will yield 9.43% in 2022 if current pace of dividend increases continue.
Overall I think Wal-mart remains a buy with my target price in the low 70's. I would welcome any comments below.
