Showing posts with label PEG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PEG. Show all posts

Saturday 18 December 2010

****Investment Valuation Ratios

This ratio analysis tutorial looks at a wide array of ratios that can be used by investors to estimate the attractiveness of a potential or existing investment and get an idea of its valuation.

However, when looking at the financial statements of a company many users can suffer from information overload as there are so many different financial values. This includes revenue, gross margin, operating cash flow, EBITDA, pro forma earnings and the list goes on. Investment valuation ratios attempt to simplify this evaluation process by comparing relevant data that help users gain an estimate of valuation.

For example, the most well-known investment valuation ratio is the P/E ratio, which compares the current price of company's shares to the amount of earnings it generates. The purpose of this ratio is to give users a quick idea of how much they are paying for each $1 of earnings. And with one simplified ratio, you can easily compare the P/E ratio of one company to its competition and to the market.

The first part of this tutorial gives a great overview of "per share" data and the major considerations that one should be aware of when using these ratios. The rest of this section covers the various valuation tools that can help you determine if that stock you are interested in is looking under or overvalued.


Monday 13 December 2010

Don't Be Misled By the P/E Ratio. It's actually growth that determines value.

By Nathan Slaughter Thursday, March 25, 2010

You might know the name Bill Miller. Aside from Warren Buffett, he could be the closest thing the investment world has to a rock star.

Every year, millions of investors set out with one goal in mind: to outperform the S&P 500. Miller's Legg Mason Value Trust did that for an impressive 15 years in a row.

That streak was finally broken in 2006, but his reputation was firmly cemented at that point. From his fund's inception in April 1982 until 2006, Miller steered his fund to annualized gains of +16%. That was good enough to turn a $10,000 investment into $395,000 -- about $156,000 more than a broad index fund would have returned.

After a long overdue slump, Miller's fund is back on top of the charts again. In fact, his fund's +47% gain during 2009 was 1,200 basis points ahead of the S&P 500.

Here's what you might not know. Miller achieved stardom and ran circles around other value fund managers by taking large stakes in companies like eBay (Nasdaq: EBAY), Google (Nasdaq: GOOG), and Amazon.com (Nasdaq: AMZN) -- highfliers that value purists wouldn't touch because of their high P/E ratios.

The message is clear: If P/E ratios are your only value barometer, then get ready to let some profits slip through your fingers. In fact, Investor's Business Daily has found that some of the market's biggest winners were trading at prices above 30 times earnings before they made their move.

All too often, novice investors buy into preconceived notions of what's cheap and what's expensive. A stock with a P/E below 10 may be a better deal than another trading at a P/E above 20. But then again it might not. These figures might get you in the ballpark -- but biting hook, line and sinker can cost you big.

Putting aside the fact that earnings can be inflated by asset sales, deflated by one-time charges, and distorted in other ways, let's remember that today is just a brief snapshot in time.

The point is, when you become a part owner in a company, you have a claim not just on today's earnings, but all future profits as well. The faster the company is growing, the more that future cash flow stream is worth to shareholders.

That's why Warren Buffett likes to say that "growth and value are joined at the hip."

You can't encapsulate the inherent value of a business in a P/E ratio. Take Amazon, for example, which has traded at 66 times earnings on average during the past five years. On occasion, the stock has garnered multiples above 80. Many looked at that figure and immediately dismissed the company as exorbitantly overpriced. And for most companies that would be true.

But as it turns out, the shares were actually cheap relative to what the e-commerce giant would soon become. In fact, the "expensive" $35 price tag from March 2005 is only about 12 times what the company earns per share now -- and guys like Bill Miller that spotted the firm's potential have since enjoyed +230% gains.

Digging into the annual report archives, I see where CEO Jeff Bezos applauded Amazon's sales of $148 million in 1997. Today, the firm rakes in that amount every 2.2 days. Clearly, that type of hyper-growth deserves a premium price.

And that's exactly why price-conscious value investors shouldn't automatically fear growth stocks -- growth is simply a component of value.

Let me show you an example. The table below depicts the impact of future cash flow growth assumptions on Company XYZ which trades today at $10. For the sake of consistency, we will keep all other variables constant.



If free cash flow climb at a modest +6% annual pace during the next five years, then your $10 investment in Company XYZ would be worth about $13.30 per share or a +33.0% return. If cash flow grows even faster, its projected value quickly ramps up to returns of +46.9%, +101.1% or even +148.8%.

We've been taught to believe there's an invisible velvet rope separating value stocks from growth stocks. But as you can see with Company XYZ, it's actually growth that determines value. So don't be blinded to the possibility that the market's most promising growth stocks can sometimes be the cheapest.

Many analysts choose to use the Price/Earnings to Growth (PEG) ratio in addition to the P/E ratio. PEG is a simple calculation -- (P/E) / (Annual Earnings Growth Rate).

The PEG ratio is used to evaluate a stock's valuation while taking into account earnings growth. A rule of thumb is that a PEG of 1.0 indicates fair value, less than 1.0 indicates the stock is undervalued, and more than 1.0 indicates it's overvalued. Here's how it works:

If Stock ABC is trading with a P/E ratio of 25, a value investor might deem it "expensive." But if its earnings growth rate is projected to be 30%, its PEG ratio would be 25 / 30 PEG.83. The PEG ratio says that Stock ABC is undervalued relative to its growth potential.

It is important to realize that relying on one metric alone will almost never give you an accurate measure of value. Being able to use and interpret a number of measures will give you a better idea of the whole picture when evaluating a stock's performance and potential.


http://www.investinganswers.com/education/dont-be-misled-pe-ratio-1115

Sunday 8 August 2010

Why We Look at the PEG Ratio











Why We Look at the PEG Ratio
One of the more popular ratios stock analysts look at is the P/E, or price to earnings, ratio. The drawback to a P/E ratio is that it does not account for growth. A low P/E may seem like a positive sign for the stock, but if the company is not growing, its stock's value is also not likely to rise. The PEG ratio solves this problem by including a growth factor into its calculation. PEG is calculated by dividing the stock's P/E ratio by its expected 12 month growth rate. 
For more information on utilizing the PEG ratio, visit Learning Markets.
How to Score the PEG Ratio
  • Pass—Give the PEG Ratio a passing score if its value is less than 1.0.
  • Fail—Give the PEG Ratio a failing score if its value is greater than 1.0.
Looking at the PEG ratio for WMT in above chart, WMT should receive a failing score. You can see that the PEG Ratio is above 1.0.
PEG Ratio: FAIL


Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/reference/dozen/peg-ratio.aspx#ixzz0w08v7wfA

PEG Ratios

Other examples




Bullbear Stock Investing Notes

Country P/E Ratios and GDP Growth

Jun. 23, 2010

Chart

If you take stock markets' price to earnings ratio and divide it by their expected growth, then interestingly China and Russia, two of the BRICs turn up as the cheapest stock markets based on this PEG (PE/Growth) method. Obviously growth estimates can be wrong, but this at least opens up the debate:

Bespoke:
Above are the PEG ratios for 22 countries around the world. For each country, we use the trailing 12-month P/E ratio for the index shown as well as estimated 2010 GDP growth. As shown, Russia and China have the lowest country PEG ratios at 1.86 and 1.90, respectively. Russia has a very low P/E at 8 and decent estimated GDP growth at 4.3%. China, on the other hand, has a rather high P/E ratio at 19.24, but its GDP growth is also very high at 10.10%. The US is right in the middle of the pack with a PEG of 5.07. Our neighbors to the south rank just above the US with a PEG of 3.85, while our neighbors to the north rank just below the US at 5.67.

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-is-the-cheapest-market-based-on-growth-2010-6#ixzz0w02Qccax


----

January 28, 2010




Many investors use the PEG Ratio as a valuation tool these days because it puts a company's growth prospects into perspective along with the widely followed price to earnings ratio. The PEG ratio is the P/E Ratio over the Growth Rate, and a PEG of less than one is generally considered good.

In this regard, Bespoke created "PEG" ratios for a number of countries using the P/E ratio of each country's main equity market index along with 2010 estimated GDP growth rates. Just as with stocks, the lower the country PEG, the more attractive.

As shown, India has the best PEG out of the countries we analyzed. It has a P/E ratio of 26.19 and estimated 2010 GDP growth of 8%. While its P/E isn't as low as a lot of countries, its growth rate is very high. China ranks 2nd with a PEG of 3.66.

The U.S. ranks in the middle of the pack with a P/E of 24.53 and estimated GDP growth of 2.6%.

At the bottom of the list sits Switzerland, Italy, and the UK, while Australia, Japan, and Spain have negative PEGs due to either a negative P/E Ratio or negative estimated GDP growth.


http://protect-your-assets.blogspot.com/2010/01/country-pe-ratios-and-gdp-growth.html

Bullbear Stock Investing Notes

Economic PEG = (P/E) / (100*GDP growth)

Thursday 5 August 2010

What is the PEG Ratio and How is it Calculated?

 The PEG or “Price/Earnings to Growth” ratio is a measure used to value a stock based on the trade-off between the P/E ratio of the stock and the company’s forecasted growth. Made popular by Peter Lynch in his book “One Up on Wall Street”, the PEG ratio is closely tracked by many investors to help determine whether a stock is currently over or under priced when factoring for growth expectations of the company.
The formula for the PEG ratio can be written as:



PEG Ratio = (Price/Earnings) / Annual Earnings per Share Growth



Stock Research Pro
PEG Ratio
P/E Ratio
Earnings Growth
PEG Ratio


A PEG ratio equal to one is thought to represent a fairly valued stock. For example, a company with a P/E ratio of 20 with a growth rate of 20% would have a PEG of 1. Like the P/E ratio, stocks with lower PEG ratios are seen as offering better value and a PEG ratio of less than 1 can indicate that the stock is currently undervaluedValue investors in particular may look for this attribute when choosing stocks for investment.
The PEG ratio is typically most beneficial when considering small and mid-cap growth companies as these organizations are more likely to pour their earnings back into the company to stimulate continued growth. Large-cap companies often allocate these earnings to dividend payments.
__________________________

Fraser & Neave Malaysia

F&N
4.8.2010
At closing price of 14.40, its ttm-PE was 18.14 and its DY was 2.99%

Historical 5 Yr Data
EPS GR 15.9%
DPS GR 14.4%
PE range 13.9 to 18.0
DY range 5.3% to 3.9%

At present price, F&N is trading at:

  • a ttm-PE that is in the upper end of its historical PE range, and
  • a DY that is at the lower end of its historical DY range.
Stock Performance Chart for Fraser & Neave Holdings Berhad

Recent Stock Performance:
1 Week-4.1% 13 Weeks13.6% 
4 Weeks33.4% 52 Weeks52.2% 

Its PEG ratio = 18.14/15.9 = 1.14.
ROE (2009) = 17.36%

Tuesday 20 July 2010

PEG Ratio

by John Jagerson

Usually value investors are looking for stocks with low value multiples or ratios. While there are many of these, probably the most popular version is the P/E or Stock Price to Earnings ratio. The drawback to a P/E ratio is that it does not account for growth. A low P/E may seem good but if the company is not growing, its stock's value is also not likely to rise.

The P/E ratio can be enhanced by including growth and turning it into the PEG ratio. A PEG ratio is calculated by dividing the stock's P/E ratio by its expected 12 month growth rate. 

One of the most notable proponents of this analysis was Peter Lynch (of Fidelity Investments fame) who suggested that a fairly valued stock will have a growth rate roughly equal to its P/E ratio. 

That means that a fairly valued stock will have a PEG ratio of 1. A lower PEG ratio may indicate a good value and a PEG ratio much greater than one could indicate that a stock is overvalued.


Peg Ratio 


Fundamentally speaking, the PEG ratio is more than it appears. 
In one ratio you have established that the company has profits, growth expectations and a reasonable stock price relative to its financial performance. These are not always givens in today's stock market. Using some minimal fundamental screening within a well diversified portfolio is a great way to remove some volatility from your own portfolio's equity curve.

Friday 25 June 2010

Comparing P/E ratios to growth rates can be significantly more useful than simply comparing two companies' P/E ratios. Why?

Let's compare Company A to its competitor in the same industry Company B to illustrate.

Company A

Price $10

Last year's EPS $1.16

Projected EPS  $1.33


Company B

Price $ 8

Last year's EPS  $1.14

Projected EPS  $1.14


Using the data above, you can see that Company A's trailing P/E is 8.6, while Company B's is just 7.

Why would you want to pay $10 for Company A's earnings when you can get Company B's - the same amount, no less  - for $2 off?  (You could even take the $2 to give yourself a treat. )  :-)

Which company would you buy - Company A or Company B?  Why?

Answer:  Click here.

Monday 12 April 2010

PEG Ratio: Why It’s More Relevant than P/E for Stocks


PEG Ratio: Why It’s More Relevant than P/E for Stocks

by DARWIN on APRIL 6, 2010

While many individual investors are familiar with the conventional Price to Earnings (P/E) ratio, the PEG ratio isn’t cited nearly as often but it really puts a stock’s valuation in the proper context.  While a P/E ratio will tell you whether a stock is “highly priced” just based on a forward earnings expectations or trailing earnings reports, a PEG ratio is the P/E ratio divided by the stock’s long term annual growth rate.  Now, the problem is estimating just what that growth rate will be.  But for relatively mature companies with transparent investor updates, it’s not too tough to reasonably discern whether you’re in the right ballpark.

PEG Ratio vs. P/E Ratio:

Consider two stocks.
1) Mature industrial company with steady earnings year over year.  P/E = 10.
2) Nimble, fast growing company. P/E = 45.
Let’s say the broad market is trading at an aggregate Price to Earnings ratio of 12.  One investor may view stock 1 as a “value” and stock 2 as being absurdly overpriced.  However, when looking at each in terms of their projected growth rate, the pendulum swings the other way.  If stock 1  is a utility that’s expected to grow at about 5% per year and stock 2 is growing at 30% per year, in the context of future growth, the PEG ratios tell a different story:
1) Stock 1 PEG ratio = 10/5 = 2
2) Stock 2 PEG ratio = 50/25 =
 1.5
Stock 2 now appears to be much more of a value.  Often times, stocks with high growth rates are more volatile and prone to massive price swings.  But if you’re able to hang on to a stock for a few years and the projected growth rate assumptions are reasonable, you’re often rewarded with a higher net return.  This is broadly reflected in the long term outperformance of tech stocks, biotech stocks, small caps and emerging market stocks vs. their counterparts.
When I provided my last portfolio update you will have noticed that many holdings fall into the stock 2 bucket since I’m young and have a long time horizon and my ultimate goal is to maximize investment returns.  Conversely, when I’m 55 and approaching retirement, I will likely be more focused on stability and income via high yield investments So, there’s no “right” way to invest, but it’s important to consider the context of your investments as well as your time horizon.
Do You Use the PEG Ratio in Evaluating Stock Purchases?

http://www.darwinsfinance.com/peg-ratio/

Thursday 3 December 2009

Slow Grower versus Fast Grower

Rather than focus on price alone, we prefer to use measures of value that relate the price of a stock to some measure of how the company is performing as a business. There are many to choose from, but we recommend two tried and true favorites:
  • The price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) and 
  • The price-to-sales ratio (P/S).

These ratios measure a stock’s price relative to its earnings or its sales. In the simplest terms, they show a prospective investor how many years’ worth of one share’s earnings (or sales) it would cost to buy a single share of a company’s stock.

Example:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tACdu4SdYelgtyWJpKMMkjQ&output=html

If a stock had a price of $10 and earnings of $1, it would have a P/E of 10. An investor would have to pay 10 years’ worth of a share’s earnings to buy a share of stock in this company. A $10 stock with a P/E of 20 is only earning 50 cents per share, and by this measure, would be twice as expensive as the other $10 stock, since it would cost the investor 20 years’ worth of earnings to buy it.

The lower the P/E, the cheaper the stock - not necessarily in dollar terms, but in terms of this measure of their value. How could such a large difference in value exist?

A P/E ratios are based on the current price and current earnings. (Analysts use either the last year’s earnings or a forecast of next year’s earnings in the calculation.) If a company’s earnings are expected to grow quickly over the years, then this higher expected future earnings stream is considered by buyers to be worth a higher price up-front (i.e. higher P/E).

The table shows the implied future price of two $10 stocks with differing earnings growth rates, assuming they continue to sell at whatever price keeps their P/E ratios unchanged (at 10 for the slower grower, and at 20 for the fast grower). The “expensive” $10 fast grower could look pretty cheap 10 years from now compared to the slow grower, even if it costs twice as much relative to earnings today.

Notice that even though the fast grower’s earnings don’t actually catch up to the slow grower’s earnings until year 15, by then the stock is worth twice as much. The fast growth rate and the expected effect on future prices are driving the price, not the actual level of earnings.

The problem, of course, is that the expected future often has a way of being very different from the future that actually happens. If the lofty expectations priced into a high P/E stock aren’t met, the price tends to take a bigger hit than if expectations were more modest.

One of the advantages of the P/E ratio (or multiple) is that it is very easy to find. Many newspapers publish this number daily, right alongside the price.

Sunday 15 November 2009

****Price to Earnings Growth Ratio (PEG) Explanation

Price to Earnings Growth Ratio (PEG) Explanation
High growth rates are one of the factors that greatly attract investors to a particular stock. As a result of the increased attention, the price of the stock may hit the skies. However, this doesn't indicate an overvaluation of the stock, because if a company is experiencing higher than the average growth it deserves the attention and the subsequent higher prices.

A ratio that manages to explain this attention is the price/earnings growth ratio (PEG). In order to calculate it you should divide the P/E by the projected earnings growth rate. If the value of the PEG is above 1, you should approach this stock with caution, because this higher value may indicate a company that trades above its growth rate allows. The value you should look for is 1 or below it.

When you compare the P/Es of different companies you may notice that the P/E of one is greater than the other. One company may appear far more expensive than the other operating in the same industry. However, if you make a closer examination and see that the one company is expected to grow more than the other, you will definitely have to choose the first.

So, when you make your analysis of a stock, you look for a forward P/E in the PEG. However, a low PEG should be searched for if a trailing P/E is applied. You should also look for a PEG that has an amount of 1 or less.

However, you should keep in mind that there are differences in the industries in which companies operate. You should not forget that a comparison between companies of the same industry should be done.

Another word of caution concerns large cap companies for which PEG is applied with a lower success. This is caused by the fact that such companies due to their size grow much slowly.

PEG has its disadvantages. One of them is its heavy reliance on earnings estimates. This is considered drawback since estimates are characterized with uncertainty until the actual numbers are reported. Since projections may not be the same as the actual numbers at the end of the year, the PEG may have totally wrong results.

Thus, you should include a margin for error. 15% is a good margin you can consider.

http://www.stock-market-investors.com/stock-investing-basics/price-to-earnings-growth-ratio-peg-explanation.html

Friday 13 November 2009

****A P/E ratio is a much better indicator of a stock's value than its market price alone.

Everything You Must Know About The P/E Ratio
And as a bonus, the PEG ration as well.
By Mark Vergenes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: What is a P/E and PEG Ratio?
The usefulness of the price-to-earnings (P/E) and price-to-earnings growth (PEG) ratios depends on how they are calculated, what kind of market you're in, and how well you grasp their limitations. This overview can help you understand the mechanics underlying these common valuation measures and better finesse stock and market evaluations.

It's so simple, it often seems sublime. The term "P/E" or "price/earnings ratio" gets bandied about so freely, it's easy to assume that everyone knows what it is and how it's used. The ratio is one of the oldest and most frequently used metrics for valuing stocks. Though simple to construct, a P/E ratio is actually difficult to interpret. It can be extremely informative in some situations, yet virtually meaningless in other contexts.

P/E ratio explained
As the name implies, the ratio expresses the relationship of a company's per-share earnings to its stock price. To calculate the P/E, simply divide a stock's current market price (CMP) by its issuer's earnings per share (EPS):

P/E = CMP ÷ EPS
Typically, P/E ratios are historic in nature. These "trailing" P/Es are calculated using EPS from the preceding four quarters. A "leading" or "projected" P/E, alternatively, is derived from earnings expected over the coming four quarters. This P/E, of course, is an estimate. Hybrid P/Es can also be created using the EPS of the past two quarters and estimates for the next two quarters. The P/E ratio is also often called the "multiple" because it shows how much investors are willing to pay for each $1 of a company's earnings. Not all companies, of course, produce profits. And it's these operations that create problems for analysts cranking out P/Es. When the divisor is negative (losses, after all, are manifested as negative EPS), some analysts report a negative P/E, while others bestow a P/E of zero on the company. Most analysts, however, just say the P/E doesn't exist.

The market P/E--at least, the market represented by the S&P 500 Index--has historically ranged between 15 and 25. A market P/E of over 18 is usually considered expensive, while a market P/E under 10 is considered inexpensive or undervalued. P/Es can also vary widely among different market segments. The P/E for the technology sector as of March 2005, for example, is around 28, while the overall multiple for financial companies is not quite 16.

Interpreting a P/E ratio
On the surface, a stock's P/E indicates the price the public is willing to pay for a company's earnings. A P/E ratio of 25, for example, suggests that investors are ready to fork over $25 for every $1 of company profits. Since a stock's price not only reflects a firm's worth now but also what investors think it will be worth in the future, this simplistic interpretation of P/E ignores growth prospects. Using forward EPS projections compensates in some measure for this.

P/Es are one of the metrics used to classify stocks as "growth" or "value" plays. As a rule of thumb, most stocks trade with P/Es 50 percent higher than their forecasted annual earnings growth. For example, a P/E of 30 would be considered reasonable for a company expected to grow earnings around 20 percent annually. That company's stock might be classified as a "growth" issue (ignoring all other factors) if it were priced above a 30 P/E, while a ratio under 30 might tip it into the "value" category.

A high P/E--that is, one above a company's "reasonable" earnings multiple or higher than the market or industry average--typically indicates very optimistic earnings prospects. A company brandishing a high P/E ratio eventually has to live up to these expectations, of course, or see its stock price drop as a consequence. A stock with a high P/E can still be a good buy for the long term, but further research may be needed to justify the price. Extreme ratios--multiples in the thousands, for instance--are typical of startups with little or no revenues.

What is "cheap"?
A P/E ratio is a much better indicator of a stock's value than its market price alone. All things being equal, a $10 stock with a P/E of 50 is much more "expensive" than a $100 stock with a P/E of 20. There are limits to this form of analysis, of course. A particular P/E can only be considered high or low by taking into account other factors, namely:

• Growth rates. How fast has the company been growing in the past, and is that rate expected to increase or at least continue into the future? A stratospheric P/E sported by a company that's growing earnings at a measly 5 percent annual clip might very well be overpriced.

• Industry. Apples, of course, should only be compared to other apples. Financial companies like banks typically have low multiples, while technology stocks' P/Es tend to be high. Using P/E to compare a tech company to a bank offers little actionable information. It's better to compare companies to others in the same industry or to the industry average.

Problems with P/E
While P/E ratios can point out overvalued or undervalued companies, P/E analysis is valid only in certain circumstances. For one thing, accounting rules change over time and vary from one country to the next, complicating cross-border analysis or historic comparisons. The inclusion of non-cash items, such as depreciation, into earnings further clouds the picture. Worse still, EPS can be presented in a variety of ways depending on how a company or an analyst chooses to do the math. EPS can be based upon either outstanding or fully diluted shares, for example. "Pro forma" EPS presentations can be especially vexing in comparisons, making it difficult to discern if apples are actually put up against apples.

Most importantly, P/E ratios are strongly influenced by inflation. P/Es, as a rule, head south during times of high inflation because of the resulting understatement of inventory and depreciation costs. The flip-side of this coin is that P/E ratios often seem lofty in periods of low inflation. When inflation moderates, central bank rate hikes become less likely, creating expansive expectations for earnings. Additionally, earnings quality rises, meaning that companies' improved financial results are more likely to be attributed to actual growth rather than the inflation of asset prices.

Trading on P/E information
Keeping the foregoing in mind, traders tread the P/E waters carefully. A low P/E ratio doesn't automatically mean that a company is undervalued--it could actually spell trouble for the company in the near future. A company that has warned of lower-than-expected earnings, for example, might look undervalued if a trailing P/E is used as the basis for analysis. Conversely, a high P/E ratio might mean that a stock is overvalued, but that's hardly a guarantee that its price will fall anytime soon. A P/E ratio is only one part of the jigsaw puzzle that is security analysis.

Factoring in growth
While P/Es can be useful in comparing one company to another in the same industry, to the market in general, or to a company's own historical ratios, their utility is still limited. Some analysts complain that P/Es, even when based upon projected EPS, don't accurately measure a company's performance in relation to its growth potential. Factors affecting a company's growth rate--the value of its brand value, its human capital, and the like--aren't reflected in a P/E alone, they say.

Enter the "PEG" or "price/earnings growth ratio" which expresses the relationship between a company's price/earnings ratio and its earnings growth. PEGs, say some pundits, help investors see whether a company is reasonably priced given future expectations. PEGs, too, permit direct comparison of companies across industries.

A PEG is formulated as:

PEG = P/E ratio ÷ annual EPS growth
As with P/Es, the number used for the annual growth rate can vary; rates can be trailing or forward looking and cover a one- to five-year time span. Most analysts argue that longer periods make for better analyses, since their use is less likely to produce outcomes skewed by short-term anomalies.

Simplistically, a PEG ratio equal to one means that the market is pricing the stock to fully reflect the stock's EPS growth. A PEG greater than one indicates a stock that is either overvalued or one that the market expects to outdo analysts' future EPS growth estimates. Growth stocks typically have PEG ratios greater than one, reflecting investors' willingness to pay more for growth at any price. Keep in mind, though, that a high PEG could also stem from recently lowered earnings forecasts.

Undervalued stocks can be signaled by a PEG ratio below one. Alternatively, the market may not expect the company to achieve the earnings growth reflected in Wall Street estimates. Value stocks reside in this territory, but a low PEG could also indicate that earnings expectations have fallen ahead of analysts' new forecasts.

PEGs, unlike P/Es, can be used to compare stocks across industries. Consider two candidates for inclusion in a portfolio. The first, a technology company growing its earnings at a 40 percent annual clip and bearing a P/E ratio of 90; and the second, a financial firm with net income growth at 25 percent, but with a P/E ratio of only 15.

Does the higher growth rate of the technology company justify its price? Or is the financial firm a better value play?

Technology Company
Financial Company

P/E Ratio
90
15

EPS Growth (%)
40
25

PEG Ratio
2.25
0.60


The financial company has a PEG ratio of 0.60 (15 ÷ 25), relatively low for its growth rate. The technology company, with its PEG ratio of 2.25 (90 ÷ 40), is quite pricey. Compared to its industry PEG, this stock may, in fact, be overpriced. Even though the technology company seemingly has higher growth prospects, this alone may not be worth the money that investors are forking out to own the stock. Because the purchase price is so high, an investor might not get a very good return on the stock if it does grow.

Conclusion
P/Es and PEGs can be useful tools for the evaluation of portfolio prospects, but they shouldn't be used in isolation. Like all financial ratios, investors need additional information to get a clear perspective on a company. To accurately determine if a company's stock is overvalued or undervalued, the company's P/E and PEG ratios should be regarded in relation to its peer group and the overall market.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark A. Vergenes, CSA (mavergenes@ehd-ins.com) with EHD Advisory Services.

http://www.business2businessonline.com/pastissues/2005/june05/vergenes_june05.htm

Thursday 12 November 2009

How is a P/E multiple used?

The Price/Earnings Multiple Enigma

If the Price to Earnings Multiple (P/E) were to be judged by usage, it wins hands down compared to any other valuation metric. It is easy to compute, can be applied across companies and across sectors, with a few exceptions. What is this ratio, how is it computed, and how to use it are questions to which you will find answers in this section.

What is a P/E multiple?
The P/E multiple is the premium that the market is willing to pay on the earnings per share of a company, based on its future growth. The ratio is most often used to conclude whether a stock is undervalued or overvalued. The P/E is calculated by dividing the current market price of a company's stock by the last reported full-year earnings per share (EPS). In effect, the ratio uses the company's earnings as a guide to value it. The P/E thus computed is also known as the trailing or historical P/E since it uses the trailing (historical) EPS in its calculations. With the advent of quarterly results, it is also possible to compute P/E, based on the earnings of the latest four quarters’ EPS. This is known as trailing twelve months P/E.

A variant of the P/E - called the forward P/E - has also been developed wherein the current market price of the stock is divided by the expected future EPS. The attempt to study P/E ratios in this manner reflects the effort to factor in the expected growth of a company.

Since stock market valuations factor in the future expectations of the market, a P/E multiple computed using historical earnings can at best be of academic value since it does not factor in the future growth in earnings. It fails to capture events that may have happened after the earnings date. For example, suppose a merger happens after the earnings have been declared, a P/E multiple based on the historical P/E will fail to capture this event in the EPS whereas the price would reflect it, creating a distortion.

The forward P/E is popularly used to find out if the premium the market is willing to pay on the earnings is line with the growth expectations. For example, the market price of Stock A is Rs 1,000, with a P/E multiple of 30 based on historical earnings. Assuming an earnings growth of 50%, the one year forward P/E changes to 20, which means the market is willing to pay 30 times its historical earnings and 20 times its one-year forward earnings.

For an investor it makes much more sense to look at the forward P/E for taking an investment decision. Each investor would have his or her own expectations regarding the future earnings growth. To that extent the forward P/E for a particular stock will vary from investor to investor.



How is a P/E multiple used?
P/E multiples reflect collective investor perception regarding a company's future. This perception is a function of various factors, like industry growth prospects, company’s position in industry, its growth plans, quantum change expected in sales or profit growth, quality of management, and other macroeconomic factors like interest rates and inflation.

Is a stock trading at a P/E of 30 more expensive than a stock trading at a P/E of 60? Such a wide variation in P/E multiples can be owing to a few reasons. If the companies are in the same industry, it could be that the company with a high P/E may be one with superior size and financials, with better prospects or even better management. The market expects this stock to outperform its peers. If they are from different industries, it could also be due to different growth prospects. For example, an energy utility will have a more sedate earnings profile than say a software company.

Besides different expectations regarding future earnings growth, some of the difference in P/E can also be attributed to the disclosures made by the management to their shareholders. Hence, qualitative factors like transparency, quality of management also impact a stock's P/E.

Stock prices, in isolation do not give any indication whether the stock is undervalued or overvalued. They have to be viewed along with the company's future prospects to arrive at any conclusion. Generally, higher the expected growth in a company's earnings, higher is the P/E multiple that it attracts in the market. The time period used for P/E calculations depends on the investment horizon of the investor and would be different for each investor. However, P/E multiples cannot be applied to loss making companies since they do not have any earnings.


Price to Earnings Growth Multiple (PEG)
The PEG multiple takes the P/E analysis to the next stage. Since P/E ratios are computed based on historic earnings, they project an inaccurate picture of the future. The PEG multiple uses expected growth in earnings, to give investors additional information. The PEG divides the historical P/E ratio by the compounded annual growth rate of future earnings. Generally, the compounded earnings growth is calculated using the forecasted earnings for the next two-three years.

For example, if a company is quoting at a P/E of 60 based on historic earnings and the compounded annual growth rate of its earnings for the next three years is 20 per cent, then its PEG is 3.

The lower the PEG, the more attractive the stock becomes as an investment proposition. It is obviously more appealing to buy a stock on a P/E of 20 whose earnings are growing at 50 per cent than to buy a stock on a multiple of 50 whose earnings are growing at 20 per cent. As a thumb rule, stocks quoting at a PEG multiple below 0.5 are considered to be undervalued, 1 to be fairly valued, and 2 to be overvalued.


http://www.hdfcsec.com/KnowledgeCenter/Story.aspx?ArticleID=8153321b-8faa-4429-abba-bbfe5f29e77d

Whose Growth rate to use in PEG calculations?

Whose Growth rate?

In computing PEG ratios, we are often faced with the question of whose growth rate we will use in estimating the PEG ratios.

If the number of firms in the sample is small, you could estimate expected growth for each firm yourself.

If the number of firms increases, you will have no choice but to use analyst estimates of expected growth for the firms. Will this expose your analyses to all of the biases in these estimates? Not necessarily. If the bias is uniform – for instance, analysts over estimate growth for all of the firms in the sector – you will still be able to make comparisons of PEG ratios across firms and draw reasonable conclusions.

http://zonecours.hec.ca/documents/A2009-1-1877347.ch18-earning-multiple(1).pdf

Using the PEG Ratio for Comparisons

 
Using the PEG Ratio for Comparisons

 
As with the PE ratio, the PEG ratio is used to compare the valuations of firms that are in the same business. The PEG ratio is a function of
  • the risk,
  • growth potential and
  • the payout ratio of a firm.

In this section, you look at ways of using the PEG ratio and examine some of the problems in comparing PEG ratios across firms.

Direct Comparisons

PEG Ratios and Retention Ratios

Most analysts who use PEG ratios compute them for firms within a business (or comparable firm group) and compare these ratios.

Firms with lower PEG ratios are usually viewed as undervalued, even if growth rates are different across the firms being compared.

This approach is based upon the incorrect perception that PEG ratios control for differences in growth. In fact, direct comparisons of PEG ratios work only if firms are similar in terms of growth potential, risk and payout ratios (or returns on equity). If this were the case, however, you could just as easily compare PE ratios across firms.

When PEG ratios are compared across firms with different risk, growth and payout characteristics and judgments are made about valuations based on this comparison, you will tend to find that:

· Lower growth firms will have higher PEG ratios and look more over valued than higher growth firms, because PEG ratios tend to decrease as the growth rate decreases, at least initially.
· Higher risk firms will have lower PEG ratios and look more under valued than higher risk firms, because PEG ratios tend to decrease as a firm’s risk increases.
· Firms with lower returns on equity (or lower payout ratios) will have lower PEG ratios and look more under valued than firms with higher returns on equity and higher payout ratios.

In short, firms that look under valued based upon direct comparison of the PEG ratios may in fact be firms with higher risk, higher growth or lower returns on equity that are, in fact, correctly valued.



Controlled Comparisons

When comparing PEG ratios across firms, then, it is important that you control for differences in risk, growth and payout ratios when making the comparison. While you can attempt to do this subjectively, the complicated relationship between PEG ratios and these fundamentals can pose a challenge. A far more promising route is to use the regression approach suggested for PE ratios and to relate the PEG ratios of the firms being compared to measures of risk, growth potential and the payout ratio.

As with the PE ratio, the comparable firms in this analysis can be defined narrowly (as other firms in the same business), more expansively as firms in the same sector or as all firms in the market. In running these regressions, all the caveats that were presented for the PE regression continue to apply. The independent variables continue to be correlated with each other and the relationship is both unstable and likely to be nonlinear.

A scatter plot of PEG ratios against growth rates, for all U.S. stocks in July 2000, indicates the degree of non-linearity.

In running the regression, especially when the sample contains firms with very different levels of growth, you should transform the growth rate to make the relationship more linear. A scatter plot of PEG ratios against the natural log of the expected growth rate, for
instance, yields a much more linear relationship.

http://zonecours.hec.ca/documents/A2009-1-1877347.ch18-earning-multiple(1).pdf

Using PEG ratio: Not all growth is created equal.

As the risk increases, the PEG ratio of a firm decreases. When comparing the PEG ratios of firms with different risk levels, even within the same sector, the riskier firms should have lower PEG ratios than safer firms.

 
Not all growth is created equal. A firm that is able to grow at 20% a year, while paying out 50% of its earnings to stockholders, has higher quality growth than another firm with the same growth rate that reinvests all of its earnings back. Thus, the PEG ratio should increase as the payout ratio increases, for any given growth rate.

As with the PE ratio, the PEG ratio is used to compare the valuations of firms that are in the same business.  The PEG ratio is a function of:
  • the risk,
  • growth potential and
  • the payout ratio of a firm.

The PEG Ratio

The PEG Ratio

Portfolio managers and analysts sometimes compare PE ratios to the expected growth rate to identify undervalued and overvalued stocks. In the simplest form of this approach, firms with PE ratios less than their expected growth rate are viewed as undervalued. In its more general form, the ratio of PE ratio to growth is used as a measure of relative value, with a lower value believed to indicate that a firm is under valued.

For many analysts, especially those tracking firms in high-growth sectors, these approaches offer the promise of a way of controlling for differences in growth across firms, while preserving the inherent simplicity of a multiple.


Definition of the PEG Ratio

The PEG ratio is defined to be the price earnings ratio divided by the expected growth rate in earnings per share:

PEG ratio =  PE ratio /Expected Growth Rate

For instance, a firm with a PE ratio of 20 and a growth rate of 10% is estimated to have a PEG ratio of 2.

Consistency requires the growth rate used in this estimate be the growth rate in earnings per share, rather than operating income, because this is an equity multiple.

Given the many definitions of the PE ratio, which one should you use to estimate the PEG ratio? The answer depends upon the base on which the expected growth rate is computed. If the expected growth rate in earnings per share is based upon earnings in the most recent year (current earnings), the PE ratio that should be used is the current PE ratio. If it based upon trailing earnings, the PE ratio used should be the trailing PE ratio.

The forward PE ratio should never be used in this computation, since it may result in a double counting of growth. To see why, assume that you have a firm with a current price of $30 and current earnings per share of $1.50. The firm is expected to double its earnings per share over the next year (forward earnings per share will be $3.00) and then have earnings growth of 5% a year for the following four years. An analyst estimating growth in earnings per share for this firm, with the current earnings per share as a base, will estimate a growth rate of 19.44%.

A consistent estimate of the PEG ratio would require using a current PE and the expected growth rate over the next 5 years.

Building upon the theme of uniformity, the PEG ratio should be estimated using the same growth estimates for all firms in the sample. You should not, for instance, use 5-year growth rates for some firms and 1-year growth rates for others. One way of ensuring uniformity is to use the same source for earnings growth estimates for all the firms in the group.

For instance, both I/B/E/S and Zacks provide consensus estimates from analysts of earnings per share growth over the next 5 years for most U.S. firms.

As the risk increases, the PEG ratio of a firm decreases.  When comparing the PEG ratios of firms with different risk levels, even within the same sector, the riskier firms should have lower PEG ratios than safer firms.

Not all growth is created equal. A firm that is able to grow at 20% a year, while paying out 50% of its earnings to stockholders, has higher quality growth than another firm with the same growth rate that reinvests all of its earnings back. Thus, the PEG ratio should increase as the payout ratio increases, for any given growth rate.
http://zonecours.hec.ca/documents/A2009-1-1877347.ch18-earning-multiple(1).pdf