A friendly reader has sent me a recent research report from KBC about Belgian holding companies, including “sum of parts” valuations for both holdings I looked at, Cie Bois Sauvage and Ackermans & Van Haaren. Just for fun, I wanted to compare my valuations with those valuation:
Cie Bois Sauvage
Here is the comparison table:
|Neuhaus Chocolate||100,00%||300,0||PE 25||265,0|
|Behrenberg||12,00%||54,0||at 1.5 times book||63,0|
|Noel Group||29,37%||4,6||PE 10||12,8|
|Codic Real Estate||23,81%||24,5||at book||23,1|
|other reals estate||60,0||as disclosed||66,8|
|NAV per share||323,2||323,7|
Strangely enoungh, the final valuation per share differs only marginally, despite some divergences, most notably did they value Neuhaus 40 mn lower than I did. Interestingly they have a target price of “only” 235 EUR and consider it as a “hold” position.
Ackermans & Van Haaren
|DEME||550||Implicit val. Takeover||995|
|Van Laere||26||0.75 book||44|
|Sipef||130||market cap 482||137|
|van Breda||336||1.2 book||470|
|Extensa||80||0.8 book||187||Extensa + Leasinnv|
|Financiere duval||40||at book||45|
|MAx Green||70||10x Earnings||10|
|Sofinim||255||75% of NAV minus cash||362|
|Net cash holding||148||Q3||-93|
Here we can see that they came out clearly much higher than I did. Especially the private banks were valued much more richly at 1.44 bn vs my 850 mn. I think that this could be a little bit aggressive. The other big difference is DEME/CFE. Where I used the initial valuation before the merger, they use the current market value, which is clearly better. This is partly off set by the lower cash balance where I used the balance before the transaction.
Interestingly again, they apply a discount to the NAV, however in Ackerman’s case only -20% vs the -30% at Cie Bois Sauvage. Their target price is 86 EUR and they rate the stock surprisingly as a buy despite an upside of less than 10%.
Overall it is interesting to see their valuation, but honestly I am not overly impressed and it does not change anything in my conclusions.