Some links

Great analysis of Nicholas Financial by the excelent Punchcard blog

Eddy Elfenbein with a great look back into history into the Great Salad Oil Swindle. Good for Warren Buffet who bought into Amex because of this.

Damodaran still thinks that Twitter is worth only 18 USD per share

Sear has been an actually good investment over the last 20 Year, if you include all spin-offs.

Will the machines take over investing ? They seem to be even better at brewing coffee now.

P/E, EV/EBITDA, EV/EBIT, P/FCF – When to use what ?

This post was prompted by a minor change in the standard Bloomberg company description which I noticed over the last view months. If one uses the function “DES” Bloomberg provides on page 3 some standard ratios which are quite helpful in order to get a first view on a company. Within the screen there are 6 boxes, the upper left box showing currently the following ratios (example: National Oilwell Varco, NOV US):

Issue Data
~ Last Px USD/80.91
~ P/E 14.4
~ Dvd Ind Yld 1.3%
* P/B 1.60
~ P/S 1.5
~ Curr EV/T12M EBIT 8.6
~ Mkt Cap 34,637.6M
~ Curr EV 35,743.6M

Interestingly, a few weeks ago (??), one would get EV/EBITDA instead of EV/EBIT. I am not sure why they changed it, but it is a good starter in order to think about the differences between P/E, EV/EBITDA and EV/EBIT

The P/E ratio

The P/E ratio is clearly the most famous valuation ratio. A low P/E strategy still seems to work. In my opinion, the P/E ratio clearly has two major fundamental drawbacks as a “strong” criteria for me as a stock picker:

– it does not reflect net debt or net cash
– under IFRS, many items (Pensions, currency changes) are booked directly into equity. This is the reason why I prefer P/Comprehensive income

EV/EBITDA Ratio

The “classic” EV/EBITDA ratio is much better in capturing debt and net cash than the P/E. As I have explained in an earlier post, one should be careful with EV in certain cases (leases, pensions), but overall, EV is much better to compare highly leveraged companies with “conservative” companies

EBITDA, as the name says, is “Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depriciation and Amortization”. Some people have called it “Earnings before everything else” but in theory, EBITDA should be a proxy for operating cashflow.

As I have written before, this metric has been used a lot by Private equity buyers in order to assess, how much debt could be pushed into a company unitl it chokes.

In the latest edition of O’Shaugnessey’s “What works on Wall Street”, EV/EBITDA is also one of the strongest single factors, much better than P/B and P/E.

The problem with EBITDA is that although it might approximate Operating Cashflow, it does not equal “free cashflow”. The “D” in EBITDA means depreciation. If you leave out depreciation, the effect will be that capital-intensive businesses which need a lot of capex (and depreciation) look suddenly quite good, although this cashflow never reaches the equity holder, because it is necessary to maintain the productive capital.

We can see this easily if we look at the DAX companies, sorted by EV/EBITDA:

EV/EBITDA T12M
Deutsche Lufthansa AG 3.26
RWE AG 3.51
K+S AG 4.33
Continental AG 4.78
E.ON SE 4.80
Deutsche Telekom AG 5.85
ThyssenKrupp AG 6.27
HeidelbergCement AG 6.82
Volkswagen AG 6.93
LANXESS AG 7.25
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG 7.26
Deutsche Post AG 8.19
Infineon Technologies AG 8.19
Fresenius SE & Co KGaA 8.74
BASF SE 8.82
Bayer AG 8.97
Linde AG 9.10
Merck KGaA 9.12
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co KGaA 10.33
Siemens AG 11.05
Henkel AG & Co KGaA 11.46
Adidas AG 11.85
Daimler AG 11.86
Deutsche Boerse AG 13.64
SAP AG 13.93
Beiersdorf AG 15.59

The cheap stocks are those companies, which are REALLY capital-intensive. Clearly, RWE and EON need to continuously reinvest into their huge power stations or they will not be able to produce any electricity soon. On the other hand, Deutsch Börse is basically a market making software with some computers and a government license. Very few assets, small depreciation.

So the “difference” between low EV/EBITDA and HIGH EV/EBITDA is not necessarily “cheapness” but different levels of capital intensity

EV/EBIT

This is why many “professionals” prefer EV/EBIT to EV/EBITDA. EBIT already deduces depreciation and should therefore be a better proxy for Free cashflow than EBITDA.

Let’s look at the Dax companies sorted by EV/EBIT:

EV/T12M EBIT EV/EBITDA T12M P/E
SDF GY Equity 5.7 4.3 7.7
CON GY Equity 7.5 4.8 13.4
EOAN GY Equity 7.5 4.8 11.0
RWE GY Equity 7.9 3.5 22.4
FRE GY Equity 11.2 8.7 17.9
HEI GY Equity 11.2 6.8 34.2
TKA GY Equity 11.3 6.3 N.A.
DPW GY Equity 12.3 8.2 16.3
BAYN GY Equity 12.7 9.0 24.7
BAS GY Equity 13.0 8.8 14.9
FME GY Equity 13.4 10.3 19.8
HEN3 GY Equity 13.6 11.5 22.7
LXS GY Equity 13.6 7.3 24.5
BMW GY Equity 13.9 7.3 10.2
DTE GY Equity 14.3 5.8 N.A.
DB1 GY Equity 15.8 13.6 19.8
VOW3 GY Equity 16.0 6.9 10.4
SIE GY Equity 16.2 11.0 17.0
LHA GY Equity 16.2 3.3 8.7
MRK GY Equity 16.6 9.1 25.6
LIN GY Equity 16.7 9.1 19.4
SAP GY Equity 17.0 13.9 22.1
BEI GY Equity 18.3 15.6 32.2
ADS GY Equity 18.6 11.9 31.8
DAI GY Equity 19.2 11.9 8.5
IFX GY Equity 22.5 8.2 28.6
 
avg 13.9 8.5 19.3

I have added also EV/EBITDA and P/E in this table. It is interesting that P/Es look rather random when we sort by EV/EBIT. Especially Lufthansa looks now really expensive as well as Daimler and Infineon. On the other hand, a relatively expensive looking stock like Fresenius now looks rather cheap. A company like Beiersdorf looks expensive in any metric and th utilities look still cheap but not Deutsch TeleKom.

For the utility stocks for instance I think EV is too low, because one needs to add the liabilities for decommissioning the Nuclear plants to EV.

A quick word on Free Cash flow and P/Free cashflow ratio

As I have written earlier, one really has to be carefull with reported free cash flows. Cashflow statement are not really audited and it is quite easy to “massage” the categories. Free cash flow is clearly an important number to look at in a second step, but as a standard indicator it has very limited use in my opinion.

Some additional pitfalls

Using EV/EBITDA and EV/EBIT smoetimes can also be tricky. Among others are operating leases, pensions, certain prepayments etc. which can change EV dramatically. But there can also be issues on the EBIT/EBITDA side:

For instance, those are the stats for Statoil ASA, the Norwegian Oil company:

P/E 11.8
EV/EBITDA 2.2
EV/EBIT 3.3

From an EVEBit perspective, this clearly looks like a no brainer: we only pay 3 times EBIT for a rock solid oil and gas company. Well, but we might have forgotten one important thing: Between EBIT and Free cash flow we have still two other items: Interest and Taxes.

As Statoil doesn’t pay much interest (only 2% of EBIT) the issues is clearly taxes. Statoil is subject to special taxes, which on average amount to 75% of EBIT. There might be some leeway to shelter certain tax payments, but in a country like Norway the companies will have to pay most of those taxes in cash.

Interest and Taxes are especially important if one compares companies across different countries. All other things equal, companies in high tax rate countries with high taxes will trade at lower EV/EBIT and EV/EBITDA multiples than in low tax low-interest rate countries. So fo instacne the Swiss MArket Index trades at 16.7 x EBIT and 12.2 EBITDA significantly higher than the German index. At least part of that is due to the much lower tax rate in Switzerland and even lower interest rates.

So a comparison of peer companies across countries with very different tax rates ind interest rates should not solely be based on EV/EBIT or EV/EBITDA.

Other issues with EV/EBIT and EV/EBITDA – financial companies and financing business

EV measures usually don’t work well with financial companies and also companies which have a lot of financing business on their books. Originally, EV is meant to capture “real” leverage, i.e. debt issued to pay for machinery, inventory etc. Debt issued to fund for instance client purchases is referred to as “operating” leverage. It is a little bit a grey area. Clearly, one should prefer a company which sells only stuff against cash than financing it for several years. The financial crisis in 2008 has shown that such “operating” leverage quickly became “strategic” if the roll over doesn’t work. On the other hand, in normal times operating leverage could be potentially adjusted against EV as you have “extra assets”.

If one tries to compare financial companies vs. industrial companies though, P/E is clearly more useful, as financial companies per definition have much higher EVs than non-financial companies.

Price /Comprehensive income

This is a ratio which I use especially for financial companies. Comprehensive income inlcudes all kind of “value changes” which are booked directly against equity, such as changes in the value of pension libailities, value changes of financial assets including hedges, currency translations etc. Especially for financial companies, comprehensive income is a pretty good leading indicator although it is rarely used in my experience.

Summary:

In general, I would recommend to look at all “Popular” ratios in parallel, because it gives a better “multi dimensional” view on a company. For “Normal” company, in my opinion, EV/EBIT is the most significant ratio, followed by P/Comprehensive Income.

P/Es and Ev/EBITDA are clearly also helpful. The most interesting cases are those, where the different ratios are completely different. This is often an indicator for somthing “special” going on and potentially a stock to investigate further.

In any case, although I like EV/EBIT, one should always “look down” in the P/L to the real bottom line (comprehenive income) as good CFOs are quite creative in moving expenses “down” the chain where many people don’t bother to look any more.

Finally as a special service, an overview over the different ratios and when to use them:

Performance review October 2013

Performance October 2013

October 2013 was the best month for the Benchmark (50% Eurostoxx, 30% Dax, 20% MDAX) since January 2012 with a gain of 5.9%. The portfolio increased only by 3.1% resulting in an underperformance of -2.8%. YTD 2013, the portfolio is up 30.5% against 24.4% for the benchmark.

Clearly the ~20% cash position explains almost half of the underperformance. Other underperfomers were Sol Spa (-9.4%), Cranswick (-8.6%). On the plus side was EMAK (+27%), Installux (+11.8%), Tonnelerie (7.6%).
Read more

Some links

Why Eike Batista’s downfall was not such a big surprise

Katsenelson likes Tesco. Just a few days before, Buffet sold part of his stake.

AlphaVulture on FFP, the French HoldCo of the Peugeot family

Jason Zweig on bad market timing by investors (hint: google the headline in order to read it)

Google, currently at the peak of investors attention, seems to loose it in some areas. I still don’t understand why the killed the Reader.

Finally, I discovered this new and very promising blog: Wertart Capital. Includes some well known ideas as well as some uncommon and interesting ideas. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED !!!

Portfolio transactions: MIKO BV, Emak SpA

MIKO

MIKO issued a short Q3 trading update 3 days ago, which in my opinion is very very good. I did already buy more MIko before and have now upgraded into a full 5% position.

This is an excerpt from the release:

Turnhout, 28 October 2013 – Miko NV, the coffee service and plastic packaging specialist listed on the NYSE Euronext Brussels, has announced that during the third quarter of 2013 its turnover was 12.8 % higher than during the same period last year. The combined turnover for the first nine months of 2013 increased by 6.7 % compared with the first nine months of 2012.

The growth in turnover is due, firstly, to increased sales in the plastic segment and, secondly, to the acquisitions in the coffee segment that marked the first half of the year (Kaffekompaniet in Sweden and ABC Mokka in Denmark).

In terms of results, there were encouraging increases in both these segments.

According to Mr Frans Van Tilborg, CEO and Managing Director of the Miko Group: “Within the coffee service sector, we have seen a slight drop in sales in most domestic markets, Germany being a positive exception. Although the economic crisis is far from over, the situation has been helped by a number of acquisitions and by reductions in the price of raw materials. In addition, the plastics division is still performing well, with impressive sales growth at each of our plants in Belgium, Poland and Germany. We are optimistic for the rest of 2013.”

This represents a huge acceleration against the first 6 months.

It is a kind of strange feeling to buy at an all-time-high, but on the other hand I try to avoid any kind of anchoring with regard to past stock prices in my decisions. Fundamentally, I think MIKO is a really good deal at this price level.

EMAK Spa

On the other hand, I sold half of my EMAK Spa position. EMAK is/was a “special situation” investment I made during the brutal capital increae in 2011. Now, the price jumped to a level where I think the risk/return relationship is not as good any more. There was no fundemenatl news, so I assume that part of this price jump is the due to the momentm of PIIGS small caps in the last few weeks.

Compared to MIKO for instance, which is growing nicely, EMAK seems to be now rather overpriced, even assuming a further recovery in the “PIIGS”.

As I am always selling too early, I sold only half of the position now 😉 I will decrease my FTSEMIB hedge accordingly, as now the Italy exposure is down to only around 12.5% of the portfolio.

AKKA SA (ISIN FR0004180537) – Finally a French- German success story ?

Akka technologies is a French company which is described in Bloomberg as follows:

Akka Technologies provides high-technology engineering consulting services. The Company specializes in scientific project management and engineering, mechanical, electronic, computing, and telecommunications project management and engineering, as well as industrial project management and engineering.

Valuation (at 22 EUR)

P/E 8.6
P/B 2.2
Div. Yield 3.0%
EV/EBITDA 5.0
EV/EBIT 6.0
Market Cap 320 mn EUR

The stockprice developed relatively well since the IPO in 2006:

This is supported by a very impressive EPS increase from 0.63 EUR in 2006 to 2.82 EUR in 2012.

Business model:

The company describes itself as „R&D outsourcing“ company. Mostly active in automobile and aviation. Main clients: EADS (22%) and Daimler Benz (28%).

I think it is a little bit more than a „high class“ temp agency. In their half year report they highlight for instance those projects:

• Daimler has just entrusted MBtech with its largest project so far, involving the design of a future vehicle.
• Renault is relying on AKKA for the industrialisation of three new vehicles in China.
• Airbus has entrusted the European coordination of one of its major contracts to AKKA.

Nevertheless, I think their business shows similar cyclical characteristics than their clients. They surely need less fixed assets, which should make results less volatile after deprecisation, but this is definetly not a super stable must-have service business. If times are getting harder for the clients, they will most likely cut first in their „outsourced“ R&D before firing their own guys. On the

I am not sure how dependent they are on the know how of the engineering companies. I guess that the clients try to avoid too much know how transfer.

Overall, this kind of business model can be quite attractive. Competitors like ALTRAN; Atkins (UK) or Bertrand (Germany) earn easily 15-20% ROICs as the business requires not much capital. This translates on average into valuation ratios which are twice as high as for AKKA (Bertrand trades at 11xEV/EBITDA, Altran at 9.6x) .

AKKA for instance showed a net Income margin of around 4.5% over the last 10 years which, due to the low capital requirements, translated into an average ROIC of around 20% which looks very attractive, especially combined with the strong growth.

Why ist he stock cheap ?

Akka used to make acquisitions in the past, but usually only smaller ones. Until 2011, the company had significant cash on hand.

In 2012 however, they made a real big acquisition: The took over a full division of Daimler called MBTech.

The acquisition as such is not unreasonable, although some issues are clearly visible:

– Akka had to take on additional 100 mn in debt to finance it
– MBTech had only one customer: Daimler
– the company is barely profitable, despite the boom in the auto industry

On the other side, Akka got the company quite cheaply (almost at book value) because no one else wanted it. As Akka was already present in Germany, the do have experience and the logic, that such a division, once it is free from ist big parent, improves a lot, does make sense.

Daimler seems to have guaranteed business for 5 years. In the meantime, Akka needs to find new clients. So far, Akka seems to proceed slower than planned with the turn around and overal profitablity is now suffering clearly. Nevertheless, from a pure business point of view this could be an interesting turn around situation ifg the plan works out.

Loking at MBTechs recruiting web site one can see that they are currently searching for 200+ engineers. Daimler, the main client of MBTech has just released surpisingly good numbers. So for the time being it doesn’t look bad.

On the other hand, the purchase of MBTech could be considered to be some kind of „spin off“. As part of the large Daimler conglomerate, this small organization was most likely „rotting“ in the backwaters. Now, within a much smaller focused organization like Akka, theoretically, a lot of improvements could be expected.

Qualitative aspects

On the plus side, the company is still majority owned by the Founder/CEO Maurice Ricci with > 50% ownership. He is 52 years old and will most likely be in the company for a while.

BUT:

Going through my quality checklist, some issues really bother me. When I look at a company, I ususally google for pictures of the CEO and board members plus I try to watch videos to get a „subjective“ impression.

When I googled Maurice Ricci, I got among others, this link http://www.racingsportscars.com/driver/photo/Maurice-Ricci-F.html

And those pictures:

So Maurice Ricci seems to enjoy race driving quite a lot. I do have a BIG problem with CEOs who have extravagant hobbies such as race driving.

There are quite a lot of examples of race driving CEOs which drove their company „against the brick wall“, among others, Ulrich Schumacher from Infineon and Eike Batista.

My theory ist hat as a race driver you have to go to the limit all the time in order to be succesful, if you fail, you just need to get a new car. However, if you are shareholder in a company run by such a CEO, you have the risk that your stocks will bet he „old car“….

This alone would be just a warning sign, but when I went through my list, some other slightly worrying issues emerged:

Akka SA behaves a little bit irrational with regard to funding, both in 2011 and 2013, they issued new shares (1 new for 10) but paid a dividend as well. For shareholders, this is clearly value destroying (costs for rights issue, taxes on dividend).

Even more worrying ist he fact, that the CEO didn’t seem to particpate in the rights offering. According to the annual report, his percantage declined more or less with the increased share count.

It looks a little bit that he needs more than the 600 k salary to finance his lifestyle and therefore still pays out the dividend although it would be better to reinvest.

Finally, I am alaways careful if a company does a big acquisition compared to ist size. In this case it seems to have been relatively cheap

Overall, Akka only scores 13 out of 28 in my qualitative check list, which is not enough for my „core value“ portion.

Interestingly, I did some „scuttlebut“ with some French investors and they had a quite high opinion of the company from the operational and technical point of view.

So what now ?

We have a stock which is quite cheap but does only score „mediocre“ with regard to quality. For me, there is one line where I would not make any compromise: Accounting and integrity . If I have the feeling that a company is „cooking“ the books or if management has been involved in shady deals in the past, I will pass.

Here however, this is not the case. But clearly the risk is higher. So what we need here is better understanding of the potential values of the investment.

In order to keep it simple, I define 3 „probable“ scenarios, all three based on a 3 year horizon

1. Status quo.
The company does how it does now. Stock price remains constant

2. Bad case
The lowest net margin for Akka since they are listed has been 3.7% in 2009. If we use this as a basis and the current P/E of 8.5 (and again sales of 900 mn) then we would end up with a earnings of 2.2 EUR per share or a fair value of 18.60 EUR.

3. Good case
In the past, Akka was able to earn a net margin of around 5%. If we assume that they can turn around Germany in 3 years time and generate an overall amount of 1 bn sales, we would have a net income of around 50 mn EUR or around 3.30 EUR per share

If we further assume that they will then trade at a p/E of around 12-15 times as most of the peers, we have a target price range of 39.6 -49.5, with the midpoint at ~45 EUR.

In the next step, I try to come up with simple probabilities and the calculate the 3 year IRR.

The simplest psoobility is always: Equal weight, 33.3% probability each. The result is calculated quickly:

3 year Horizon – Equal weight
Akka Prob
Low case 33.3% 18.6
Status quo 33.3% 22
Good case 33.3% 45

Expected value in 3 yaers 28.53
IRR p.a. 9.1%

So if we assume, all three scenarios are equally likely, weg et an IRR of 9.1% over 3 year which is not very attractive.

We could also look at the scenario where we can assume that the turnaround is basically a 50/50 gamble:

3 year Horizon – 50/50 turnaround
Akka Prob
Low case 25.0% 18.6
Status quo 25.0% 22
Good case 50.0% 45

Expected value in 3 yaers 32.65
IRR p.a. 14.1%

In that case we would get an IRR of 14.1. Not bad, but as this is clealry an above average risk stock maybe not enough.

If we assume a 75% probability of the MBTech turn around, we get the following picture:

3 year Horizon 20% IRR
Akka Prob
Low case 12.5% 18.6
Status quo 12.5% 22
Good case 75.0% 45

Expected value in 3 yaers 38.83
IRR p.a. 20.8%

So in order to come to a 20% IRR which I think would bet he right „Hurdle“, one has to be quite sure that the turn around is succesful.

If one uses the 50/50 scenario to find the „status quo“ level which would provide an expected 20% IRR, we would end up with 18 EUR.

So long story short summary:

I would buy the stock either if the price would be around 18 EUR or if I am convinced that the turnaround is happening with at least 75% probability (and the car sector is not cratering).

So for the time being, despite looking attractive from a pure valuation point of few, the risk/return for Akka is not good enough in order to qualify as core value. As it is no “special situation” neither (at least not in my definition), for the time being it will be a stock for the watch list only.

Some links

The Brooklyn Investor is looking at some potential “Outsider” companies: The “new” Teledyne and Colfax from the US and Transdigm.

Especting Value is looking at UK wallpaper company Colefax

Very interesting presentation from Kerrisdale on Lindsay, an US company which produces automated water irrigation equipment for farmers.

Interesting presentation with some stock ideas from German value fund Discovery Capital.

The funny story of Carl Icahn’s sale of netflix shares by Kid Dynamite. His son didn’t want to sell…..

Finally a non-investment story from Sports Illustrated about the remarkable life a former NBA player who dissapeared on a boat some 10 years ago. I found it remarkable for several reasons:
– captivating story
– great presentation, if online stories are presented like this, traditional media outlets might stil have a chance
– there is finally a “hidden” investment angle: The best friend of the NBA player was Patrick Byrne, CEO of the company overstock.com. Not only is overstock.com a company which is suspected to be a fraud by Sam Antar, but he is also the son of GEICO CEO John Byrne, highly admired by no one else than Warren Buffet himself.

Short update Portugal Telecom /OI: Sale of 6.1% stake by Caixa Geral

In my first post on the PTC/OI merger I wrote among others the following:

For some PTC shareholders, the problem might be that the suddenly do not hold a Portuguese/European stock but a Brazilian one. According to the official announcement, the new stock will be listed in Brazil, US and on NYSE Euronext, so technically it should be not a problem for shareholders.

Today, Government owned Portuguese Bank Caixa Geral, which owns 6.1% in PTC announced to sell their stake:

Oct 24 (Reuters) – Portugal’s state-owned bank Caixa Geral de Depositos will sell its outstanding 6.11 percent stake in Portugal Telecom in a private sale as part of plans to sell non-core assets, the bank said on Thursday.

The sale of 54.77 million shares will be carried out via an accelerated bookbuilding process aimed at certain investors.

I am not sure if they wanted to sell anyway or if they have issues to hold a Brazilian stock, but in either case I think such a sale provides a good opportunity.

The stock has been currently suspended from trading, but I will try to increase my 0.5% stake to 1% today.

Van Lanschot N.V. (ISIN NL0000302636) – High end Private Banking at a discount price ?

As this is going to be a pretty long post, the “executive summary” upfront:

– For a specialized private bank without PIIGS exposure, Van Lanschot looks extremely cheap (P/B 0,5 vs. 2.0 for other private banks)
– negative 2012 result is very likely „kitchen sink“ result in order to give new CEO a head start
– turn around story. Strategy change under way, goals look achievable
– Van Lanschot has no controlling shareholder, a potential M&A transaction likely if turn-around is sustainable
– potential secular tail wind because of crack down on Swiss Private Banks and regulation for large international banks
– negative overall sentiment vs. Dutch real estate market could explain very low valuation

Read more

« Older Entries Recent Entries »