Buffett likes companies with high and increasing returns on equity (ROE)

HIGH RETURNS ON EQUITY

Buffett is interested in companies that have rights rates of earnings on equity and likes them even more where the return rates are increasing. He reasons that, with a company like this, he is better off if the company pays no or little dividends and retains the money to earn even more for its owners.

• In addition, where no dividend is received, there is no income tax payable by the shareholder. 
• Instead, the investor gets the value of the increase in value in the shares which will, eventually, rise to reflect the enhanced earnings. 
• The shareholder can then retain the shares, sell them at a time that best suits them, if they wish, and take advantage of the capital gains taxation regime.

It is why potential investors should calculate the company’s history of returns on equity and management of retained earnings.

Warren Buffett's secret - THE COMPOUNDING FACTOR

EXPLANATION

This may be old hat to some readers but it is worth remembering how compounding is one of the keys to Warren Buffett’s investment success.

The compounding factor is easy to understand. Compound interest (or compounding of earnings) is simply the ability of interest (or investment return) earned on a sum of money to earn additional interest (or investment return), thereby increasing the return to the owner of the money or investor. It works like this and we will use interest as the exemplar:

You deposit a sum of money, say $1,000, in a bank or other financial institution that earns interest at the rate of 5 per cent, payable annually. At the end of the first year, you have earned $50 and have the right to get your $1,000 back.

Suppose however that you want to invest the money long-term, for say 10 years. You now have two options.

OPTION A: TAKE INTEREST PAYMENTS

You can have the interest paid to each year, in which case you will receive $50 each year to spend or use as you wish. At the end of the 10-year period, you will get your final interest payment and your $1,000 back.

OPTION B: RE-INVEST INTEREST

You can choose to re-invest your interest and earn interest each year on the accumulated interest payments as well as on the original investment. This means that you do not get annual payments but, at the end of the 10-year period, you will get a lump sum payment of $1625. This is compound interest.

Why this much larger amount? Because your interest earns interest each year like this (calculations rounded to nearest 50 cents). 

Year	Principal sum	Interest earned	New principal sum
1	1000	50	1050
2	1050	52.50	1102.50
3	1102.50	55.00	1157.50
4	1157.50	58	1215.50
5	1212.50	61	1273.50
6	1273.50	64	1337.50
7	1337.50	67	1404.50
8	1404.50	70	1474.50
9	1474.50	74	1548.50
10	1548.50	77	1625

The higher the interest, the bigger the capital gain. At 10 per cent, the sum would increase to $2594.00; at 15 per cent, to $4055.00.

Warren Buffet is said to look at the compounding factor when deciding on investments, requiring a stock investment to show a high probability of compound growth in earnings of at least 10 per cent before making an investment decision.

COMPOUNDING AND RETAINED EARNINGS

Warren Buffett has on several occasions referred to the use by a company of its retained earnings as a test of company management. He tells us that, if a company can earn more money on retained earnings than the shareholder can, the shareholder is better off (taxation aside) if the company retains profits and does not pay them out in dividends. If the shareholder can achieve a higher rate of return than the company, the shareholder would be better off if the company paid out all its profits in dividends (taxation situation again excluded) so that they could use the money themselves.

Put simply, if a company can retain earnings to grow shareholder wealth at better than the market rates available to shareholders, it should do so. If it can’t, it should pay the earnings to shareholders and let them do with them what they wish.

 HIGH RETURNS ON EQUITY

This is why Buffett is interested in companies that have rights rates of earnings on equity and likes them even more where the return rates are increasing. He reasons that, with a company like this, he is better off if the company pays no or little dividends and retains the money to earn even more for its owners.

In addition, where no dividend is received, there is no income tax payable by the shareholder. Instead, the investor gets the value of the increase in value in the shares which will, eventually, rise to reflect the enhanced earnings. The shareholder can then retain the shares, sell them at a time that best suits them, if they wish, and take advantage of the capital gains taxation regime.

It is why potential investors should calculate the company’s history of returns on equity and management of retained earnings.

BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY AND RETAINED EARNINGS

Berkshire Hathaway does not, following Buffett’s mantra, pay dividends to its shareholders and this is one reason why its compound return over the years of Buffett-Munger management has been so high.

The downside of course is that shareholders have not received dividends, meaning, that if they were dependent on money coming in at a given time, their only recourse, in relation to their shareholding, would be to sell the shares or borrow against them.

Having regard to the huge price of a single share over the past few years, this meant that investors may have had to either keep all their shareholding or dispose of it, not always the choice they wanted. Berkshire Hathaway partly catered for this dilemma by introducing B shares, which are in essence a fractional unit of the normal shares.

A POWERFUL FORCE

When asked to nominate the most powerful force on earth, Albert Einstein is reputed to have answered ‘compound interest’. Buffett might well agree.

http://www.buffettsecrets.com/compound-interest.htm

7 Important Stock Investing Advice from Warren Buffett!

Summarized Overview

In this article, you’ll find information on the stock investing ideas that Warren Buffet wants all stock investors to know, strategy he uses to maximize return, price of stocks that he willing to pay, key financial ratio that is so important to him, type of managers he loves, and kind of management he trusts.

7 Stock Investing Advices for Beginners

This stock market investing advice will help you on how to pick stocks Warren Buffet way.

Stock Investing Advices #1: Simple Business Model

You must understand the business itself or at least like and use it. Warren Buffett likes to patronize/use Nike, Coke and Gillette products and he is a believer of his investments. Have time to read and study the business model and the financial reports that takes only 2-3 hours per day. Invest as if you will buy the business.

Do you know why this is so important?

When come to investing, predicting what will happen tomorrow is something that you can’t live without. Forecasting what the future will be is the only way you can estimate how much return you’ll be getting later on. So, if you really understand the business inside out, you can project how the company performs 30 years down the road; take into consideration the national economy, competition from others and change in customers’ lifestyle.

Most companies here in Philippines have investor relation’s page in their websites where you can browse their financial reports.

Stock Investing Advices #2: Wide Economic Moat

In simple terms, it must dominate its market and can somehow dictate its product’s prices. Warren Buffet himself avoids regulated industries, commodity businesses as well as capital intensive industries. Look out Nike, it has its own market around the world and it can dictate its own product prices regardless of its competition because people buy Nike for its brand. Further, company should finance its capital from operating cash flow and not depending on borrowings. That is why, Warren Buffet love ‘franchise’, for example, Furniture Mart (the lowest cost in the industry), The Washington Post (market dominance and leader), Coke (strong brand name) and Candies (premium priced and high quality products that serve niche market).

How about Jollibee or Meralco here in our country?

Stock Investing Advices #3: Sustainable Growth

Serving the existing niche market is not enough. Instead, Warren Buffet wants the company to grow continuously and exponentially. Therefore, he looks for managements that have the ability to widen their economic moat consistently over the past years. Their businesses must be positioned where the demand able to grow continuously; Gillette is his best example. In the same time, always be ready for any possible trouble to the business, and most importantly back up your investment plan!

Have you heard of the recent plans of San Miguel Corporation and Metro Pacific Investment Corporation?

Stock Investing Advices #4: Excellent Capital Management

The Management should utilize the available resources for the highest return to the company and to its shareholders. Shareholders should be benefited for their investments thru dividends. Management carries the trust of the shareholders, thus, they should act and think as owners too. Moreover, it is better if the management holds a huge number of stocks too, since they will act as true owners and will not think short term but instead, will make sure that the company earns in the next 20 years or more!

Stock Investing Advices #5: Effective Management Team

Invest in company that has honest and capable managers. They should be so capable that Warren Buffet himself admires the way the managers do things. In Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting year 2000, he once said, “we want managers who tell the truth and tell themselves the truth, which is more important”. He loves cost conscious and frugal type of managers who are honest and integrity as well.

Stock Investing Advices #6: Superior ROE

The general rule that it is above 15! Why ROE, and not the other financial ratios? Well,return on equity indicates how effective the management team converts the reinvested money into cash. The higher the return, the more profitably the company can reinvest its earnings. The faster the company able to turn the reinvested earnings into profits, the faster its value increases from one year to another. And mind you, it is a big challenge to the management to consistently create value for every penny they spend. To prove this, not many stocks that has 15 per cent ROE consistently for the past 20 or 30 years, worldwide.

Stock Investing Advices #7: Buy at Discount Price

After the process of selection, now is the time to buy them! But of course make sure it is below the intrinsic value and you must have the margin safety of 80% discount from the calculated intrinsic value. Warren Buffet has to make sure he buys the stock at the lowest price possible. Have you heard the recent investment of Mr. Buffett on IBM and in these times of Euro and US Debt Crisis? In the same time, he has to be real that not to set very low price till he misses the golden opportunity. Even if the stocks are so profitable but the price is too high, he will just passes the opportunity to somebody else.

If you want to be as successful as Warren Buffet in stock investing, study each point thoroughly. Ignoring either one advice is enough to make you broke in stock market; simply because, in stock investing, due diligence counts.

Intentionally not following the advice proves that you are not ready for investing;perhaps you are just looking for fast cash.



http://www.investorluranski.com/2011/11/7-important-stock-investing-advices.html#more

3 Investing Traps -- And How To Avoid Them

These tips should help you sidestep some common accounting pitfalls.

Alcoholics have 12 steps. Grievers have five stages. Investors have their phases, too, with the biggest leap coming when a fledgling shareholder begins tossing accounting ratios around. I've calculated ratios for years myself, both as a hedge-fund analyst and in making share recommendations for The Motley Fool, and I'll say this: ratios are both powerful and open to misuse by novices. I'd like to share a few tricks with you to help you avoid some common pitfalls.

Trap 1: Focusing too much on return on equity (ROE)

The much-vaunted ROE seems pure: take net profits, divide by shareholders' equity, and you see how efficient a business is with investors' money. ROE is Warren Buffet's favourite ratio, and executive pay is sometimes tied to it.

When it's a trap: When it's enhanced by debt. Borrowing funds to make more money for shareholders isn't necessarily evil, and is sometimes beneficial. But investors strictly watching ROE will miss the additional risk taken by a management team 'gearing up' to meet performance targets.

Protect yourself: Add return on invested capital (ROIC) to your arsenal. Using the same principle as ROE, ROIC essentially compares after-tax operating profits to both debt and equity capital, and thus provides a better measure of operational success that can't be inflated by a financing decision. Moreover, research by American equity strategist Michael Mauboussin of Legg Mason shows that companies whose ROICs either rise or remain consistently high tend to outperform others. Search online to find the precise formula, or drop me a comment in the box below.

Using Standard & Poor's Capital IQ database, I screened for companies with returns on capital (a near-identical cousin of ROIC) above 20% that have seen an improvement in return on capital during the past five years. These shares are not recommendations, but rather screen results that may be of interest given the discussion.

Company	Market cap (£m)	Return on capital
		Last fiscal year	Five years ago
Croda International (LSE: CRDA)	2,638	26.3%	22.8%
Renishaw (LSE: RSW)	1,053	25.1%	16.9%
Burberry (LSE: BRBY)	6,172	24.4%	20.0%

Trap 2: Taking turnover growth at face value

A sale is a sale, right? Wrong. Turnover is a prime line for accounts manipulation.

When it's a trap: Intricate shenanigans with turnover figures can be tough to uncover, but a simple rule of thumb is to become suspicious if growth in trade receivables (for instance, the amounts customers owe) meaningfully exceeds growth in revenues. This could indicate 'channel stuffing', whereby a company extends overly generous terms to customers simply to gain a short-term turnover boost.

Protect yourself: Using a screening tool or your own sums, compute the relative growth of both sales and trade receivables, particularly for companies whose growing turnover forms a major part of your investing thesis.

Again using Capital IQ, I noticed retailer Dunelm (LSE: DNLM) reported attractive 9% growth in sales last year (especially in this consumer market) -- albeit accompanied by a troubling 22% increase in trade receivables. While not a red flag outright, it's something to investigate further.

Trap 3: Using accounting profits to compute dividend cover

I've done this myself, and feel it's probably acceptable with stable companies clearly able to pay shareholders.

When it's a trap: The first thing a budding investor learns is that for accounting reasons, profits don't always match cash flow -- from which dividends are paid. Though cash flows and profits should theoretically match over time, profits are skewed by 'accrual' calculations, such as spreading the cost of equipment purchases over the life of the equipment, versus charging the costs in the year they occurred.

Protect yourself: Experienced analysts use free cash flow instead of reported earnings to produce a more reliable measure of dividend safety. Read this old-school Fool article for a moredetailed discussion on free cash flow. Swapping cash flow for accounting profits in your dividend cover calculation should increase its reliability.

Capital IQ turned up these companies as having cash flows materially exceeding accounting profits.

Company	Net profits (£m)	Free cash flow (£m)
Marks & Spencer (LSE: MKS)	603	701
Sage Group (LSE: SGE)	189	283
Rexam (LSE: REX)	154	265

There you have it. You're now three traps wiser, which is a step ahead of most investors. Indeed, while spotting numerical chicanery may be best for sidestepping share-price stinkers, avoiding losers is more than half the battle to building a winning portfolio.

http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2012/02/02/3-investing-traps-and-how-to-avoid-them.aspx?source=ufwflwlnk0000001

The Risks of Debt-Driven Returns on Equity

The three levers of ROE are:
- net profit margin  (achieve through operational efficiency)
- asset turnover (achieve through operational efficiency)
- financial leverage (achieve through employing high debt)

But does it matter if a company's high ROE comes from high debt and not operating efficiency?

If a company has a steady or steadily growing business, it might not matter that much.

For example, companies in the consumer-staples sector, where demand is stable, can handle fairly large debt loads with little problem.  And the judicious use of debt by such companies can be a boon to shareholders, boosting profitability without unduly increasing risk.

If a company's business is cyclical or volatile in some other way, though, watch out.

The problem is that debt comes with fixed costs in the form of interest payments.  The company has to make those interest payments every year, whether business is good or bad.

When a company increases debt, it increases its fixed costs as a percentage of total costs.

In years when business is good, a company with high fixed costs as a percentage of total costs can make for a great profitability because once those costs are covered, any additional sales the company makes fall straight to the bottom line.

When business is bad, however, the fixed costs of debt push earnings even lower.  

That is why debt is sometimes referred to as leverage:  It levers earnings, making strong earnings stronger and weak earnings weaker.

When companies in cyclical or volatile businesses have a lot of leverage, their earnings therefore become even more volatile.  

So the next time you're thinking about profitability, make the distinction between the kind that is internally generated (through operational efficiencies) and the kind that is inflated by debt (through leverage).

You can make a lot of money of stocks of companies structured like the latter, but your return is more assured with stocks of companies like the former.

Financial Leverage - Lever of ROE

The three levers of ROE are net margin, asset turnover and financial leverage.

The third lever of ROE, financial leverage, is a measure of how much debt the company carries.

The way in which raising financial leverage increases ROE is a little less intuitive.

If a company adds debt, its assets increase (because of the cash inflows from the debt issuance) and so does its total debt.

Equity = Assets - Total Liabilities
Assets = Equity + Total Liabilities

Since equity is equal to assets minus total debt, a company can decrease its equity as a percentage of its assets by increasing its debt.

ROE
= Net Profit/Revenue  x  Revenue/ Asset   x   Asset/Equity
=  ROA  x  Asset/Equity

In other words, assets - the numerator of the financial leverage figure - increases, so the overall financial leverage number rises, boosting ROE.

Net Margin and Asset Turnover - Levers of ROE

The three levers of ROE are net margin, asset turnovers and financial leverage.

Not all the 3 levers of ROE are made equal.

The first two levers, net margin and asset turnover, are measures of how efficient a company's operations are.

Increasing net margins - which means a company is turning a larger portion of its sales into profits - will increase profitability.  

A high asset turnover, which expresses how many times a company sells, or turns over its assets, in a year is also a sign of efficiency.

The product of net margin and asset turnover is called return on assets, or ROA, and it is an excellent measure of operational profitability.

ROA = Net Profit Margin x Asset Turnover

The higher a company's ROA, the better.

Some companies emphasize high net margins to pump up their ROA; others emphasize rapid turnover.  

For example:

Coca Cola KO

Between 1994 and 1998, Coke's net margins averaged 18%.

Coke was able to leverage its strong brand name into higher prices, resulting in fat net margins.

Cott COTTF, a Canadian produce of discount, non-brand-name soda.

Cotts's average net margin was less than 5%.  

Cott, on the other hand, targeted the low end of the market with bargain prices, earning a slimmer profit margin on each sale but (hopefully) moving a lot more merchandise per unit of assets.

Cott's asset turnover during the same period was 1.7, compared with Coke's 1.1.  But that wasn't nearly enough to offset Coke's much higher net margins, and Coke's ROA of 24% trounced Cott's 4%.  

This is not to say that focusing on asset turnover at the expense of margins is always a bad thing.  

Wal-Mart WMT

Wal-Mart WMT has lower margins than most other major retailers because it emphasizes lower prices.  

But Wal-Mart also generates a higher ROA than most of these competitors because it operates so efficiently that its asset turnover is much higher.

In 1998, for example, Wal-Mart''s asset turnover was 2.8, as opposed to 1.1 for old-line retailer Sears S and 2.0 for rival discounter Dayton-Hudson DH.

Levers of ROE

Return on equity, or ROE, is the most common measure of a company's profitability.

But ROE is itself the product of 3 ratios, or levers:

• net margin (earnings/revenues, expressed as a percentage),
• asset turnover (revenues/assets), and,
• financial leverage (assets/equity).

ROE 

= Net Profit Margin x Asset Turnover X Financial Leverage

= Net Profit/Revenue  x  Revenue/Total Asset  x   Total Asset/Equity

= Net Profit/Equity

Multiplying the three levers together gives us ROE, and raising any one of these three levers will increase ROE.

ROE and Internet Stocks

As an example, consider the fastest growing segment of 1999, Internet stocks.

Most Internet companies are growing rapidly, but few of them are generating profits.



Apart from America Online AOL and its 25% ROE in 1999, none have generated a high return on capital. 


In 1999, the ROE for market darling Amazon.com AMZN was negative 270%.

• In other words, for each dollar shareholders had invested in the company, Amazon lost $2.70.  
• To replenish the lost capital, the company must either issue debt or turn to shareholders for more money -  and there are still plenty of people willing to pony up the money to own a piece of Amazon.  
• If Amazon is going to justify its price, it will eventually have to generate good returns on capital, and whether it can do that depends on which pundits you listen to.  

But there is no argument that returns on capital are the engine that drives stock prices in the long run.


Companies that go on to earn good returns on capital - ROEs of more than 15% or 20% - will probably make good investments.   

Those that struggle to earn a decent return will probably be wretched investments, regardless of how fast they grow.  

So, if someone tries to talk you into investing $10,000 in a restaurant or a few hundred share of an Internet stock, don't ask how fast the company will grow.  Ask how the heck it is going to earn a good return on its capital.

Why Return on Equity Matters

Let's say you want to open a whole chain of restaurants.

In the early years of building your business empire, you will be adding to your capital base aggressively.  

But because of the costs of opening restaurants, you will probably take losses; most companies in their formative stages lose money.  

If after a few years you have sunk $500,000 into your restaurants but are losing $50,000 annually, your return on capital is negative 10%.

It is not necessarily bad for a company to earn a negative return on equity - if it can earn a high return in the future, that is.

An investor will stomach a negative 10% ROE for his restaurants if he believes they can earn much higher returns in the future.

The trouble is, in a company's rapid-growth phase, when returns on equity are most often small or negative, it is tough to separate a good business (one that can earn a high ROE) from a bad business (one not able to).  After all, each is losing money.

Analyzing such companies means asking questions like

• "Is this a company with enough pricing power to eventually command a premium price for its product?"
• And "Is this a company with enough of a cost advantage that it can undercut the competition?"

It means, in other words, asking whether the company's business can either generate a high net margin (profit/sales) or a high asset turnover (sales/assets), the two key components of a high return on capital. 

Return on Equity - it is the long-term return on capital that excites

The way analysts usually measure return on capital for publicly traded companies is return on equity, or ROE.  

ROE =  Net earnings / Shareholders' equity

Shareholders' equity, or equity capital = Total assets - Total liabilities

Shareholders' equity is the part of the company owned by stockholders - the capital they have invested in the company.

A company X earned an incredible 63% on its equity capital in 1999.   In other words, for every $1 of shareholder money invested in the firm, this company X generated an annual profit of $0.63.

Be careful, though.  It is easier to post a large ROE in a single year than it is to maintain that large ROE over a longer period.

Company Y, for example, earned 58% on its equity in 1999, but if you average the company's ROEs over the five-year period from 1995 to 1999, the figure drops to a much less impressive 19%.

It is that long-term return on capital that we're interested in.

Measuring Returns on Capital

What makes a company great?

It is not rapid growth.

It's not landing on a best-of-the-year list.

Rather, it is the ability to generate high returns on capital.

Suppose you decide to open a business.  The money you spend building the business is your capital.

Whether the business is a good investment depends on how much profit you make as a percentage of that capital.

If you earn a profit of $10,000 in a given year and you've invested $100,000 in building the business, you've made a 10% return on your capital.

Not spectacular, but better than a savings account.

A visual glossary of corporate finance

http://glossary.income-outcome.com/

Free Cash Flow and Return on Equity

http://roanyong.com/2008/08/19/analyzing-a-company-the-basic/

ROE and ROIC

 Management is concerned about return on invested capital and return onshareholder equity and that's the focus. Everything else takes a backseat to that. 

Return on Equity

http://amgstr.blogspot.com/

Return on Equity (RoE) = Net Income (NI) / Equity

or
Return on Equity = Return on Assets (RoA) x Financial Leverage (FLA)
and
RoA = NI / Assets
and FLA = Assets / Equity

At each stage, the formula can be further decomposed. For instance, Return on Assets can be decomposed to:

RoA = Net profit margin (NPM) x Total Asset Turnover

This formula captures the essence of operational efficiency in terms most lay people can understand. How [efficiently] are we selling (Total Asset Turnover - TAT) [with respect to the assets we use to produce our product - directly related to revenue and number of products sold at a constant price]?

The DuPont model goes on to further decompose NPM as gross product margin, tax burden and effect of 'non-operating items' etc, but even at this stage, this formula gives a good basis for common size comparison with other companies in the industry.

Let's look at each component and see if we can describe them in layman's terms:

• Return on Equity - How much income are we making relative to the equity we put in?
• Financial leverage - How much debt have we applied relative to our equity?
• Return on Assets - How much income are we making relative to all the capital we put it (including debt)?
• Total Asset Turnover - How [efficiently are we using our assets]?
• Net Profit Margin - For each unit of good or service we sell, after the costs, how much do we keep?
• Gross Profit Margin - Before we do accounting and pay tax, how much of each good or service do we keep for each sale?
• Tax burden - After accounting practices, what is the effect of our current tax rate?
• Non-operating items - Can we use depreciation and amortization to affect our tax burden?

It can quickly tell you the status of the leverage, operational efficiency and sales to identify if there are problems from a high level to determine if certain areas warrant a deeper investigation. No calculus required.

ROE - Key Performance Indicator for Company Management

Introduction of ROE

Return on Equity (ROE) is a term important in shares/equity investment. The simple formula for ROE is Net Profit / Shareholdings. In short, it is measured by how strong is the top management to produce profit based on current shareholdings. In DuPont formula, it is calculated as Net Profit Margin * Asset Turnover * Equity Multiplier. I will explain to you the components one by one:


Simple DuPont Formula Explanation  

1. Net Profit Margin (Net Profit / Revenue) - This is one of the very key indicators to measure company performance. A good company with 'Monopoly' status always have a better profit margin as compared to the peer companies. It can be achieved by Economy of Scales or through operation efficiencies. When you notice that the company's profit margin is increasing, perhaps you can check whether it is due to a new product launched or operation efficiencies or due to cost control improvement etc. 
2. Asset Turnover (Revenue / Asset) - It is an indicator to show whether the company is capable to have a better turnover by selling more products with limited asset available. A low non-current asset based company can perform better than a high non-current asset based company due to its bargaining power against customer.
3. Equity Multiplier (Asset / Equity) - Sometimes a good ROE can be due to high equity multiplier. It means that the company has bigger borrowing from bank/payable/bond holders to achieve higher asset. In finance industry, the leverage can be as high as 10 times and above. You must compare the equity multiplier with its peer companies. Normally if company can achieve optimal capital structure, the WACC can be the lowest. Thus, investor can achieve higher returns.

Things to take note



It does not necessary mean that you can achieve a good returns by investing in high ROE company. However, if you can find out a company is having higher and consistent ROE as compared to
its peer company in same sector, it means that this company's management is better to produce better returns as compared to rest. You must also take into considerations the other figures such as Price per Earning ratio, Dividend yield etc.

Conclusion


By comparing ROE with peer companies, you also must take note that whether the company manipulate its annual report.  It is also good that you can do a relative comparison on P/E ratio and Dividend Yield while making investment decisions.  With a good and consistent ROE, the longer you hold the investment the better the profit you can forsee in the long run.


http://www.jackphanginvestment.com/2011/04/roe-key-performance-indicator-for.html

ROA And ROE Give Clear Picture Of Corporate Health

by Ben McClure 

With all the ratios that investors toss around, it's easy to get confused. Consider return on equity (ROE) and return on assets (ROA). Because they both measure a kind of return, at first glance, these two metrics seem pretty similar. Both gauge a company's ability to generate earnings from its investments. But they don't exactly represent the same thing. A closer look at these two ratios reveals some key differences. Together, however, they provide a clearer representation of a company's performance. Here we look at each ratio and what separates them.

ROE
Of all the fundamental ratios that investors look at, one of the most important is return on equity. It's a basic test of how effectively a company's management uses investors' money - ROE shows whether management is growing the company's value at an acceptable rate. ROE is calculated as:

Annual Net Income             Average Shareholders' Equity

You can find net income on the income statement, and shareholders' equity appears at the bottom of the company's balance sheet.

Let's calculate ROE for the fictional company Ed's Carpets. Ed's 2009 income statement puts its net income at $3.822 billion. On the balance sheet, you'll find total stockholder equity for 209 was $25.268 billion; in 2008 it was $6.814 billion.

To calculate ROE, average shareholders' equity for 2009 and 2008 ($25.268bn + $6.814bn / 2 = $16.041 bn), and divide net income for 2009 ($3.822 billion) by that average. You will arrive at a return on equity of 0.23, or 23%. This tells us that in 2009 Ed's Carpets generated a 23% profit on every dollar invested by shareholders.

Many professional investors look for a ROE of at least 15%. So, by this standard alone, Ed's Carpets' ability to squeeze profits from shareholders' money appears rather impressive. (For further reading, see Keep Your Eyes On The ROE.)

ROA
Now, let's turn to return on assets, which, offering a different take on management's effectiveness, reveals how much profit a company earns for every dollar of its assets. Assets include things like cash in the bank, accounts receivable, property, equipment, inventory and furniture. ROA is calculated like this:

Annual Net Income             Total Assets

Let's look at Ed's again. You already know that it earned $3.822 billion in 2009, and you can find total assets on the balance sheet. In 2009, Ed's Carpets' total assets amounted to $448.507 billion. Its net income divided by total assets gives a return on assets of 0.0085, or 0.85%. This tells us that in 2009 Ed's Carpets earned less than 1% profit on the resources it owned.

This is an extremely low number. In other words, this company's ROA tells a very different story about its performance than its ROE. Few professional money managers will consider stocks with an ROA of less than 5%. (For further reading, see ROA On The Way.)

Watch: Reture On Assets

The Difference Is All About Liabilities
The big factor that separates ROE and ROA is financial leverage, or debt. The balance sheet's fundamental equation shows how this is true: assets = liabilities + shareholders' equity. This equation tells us that if a company carries no debt, its shareholders' equity and its total assets will be the same. It follows then that their ROE and ROA would also be the same.

But if that company takes on financial leverage, ROE would rise above ROA. The balance sheet equation - if expressed differently - can help us see the reason for this: shareholders' equity = assets - liabilities. By taking on debt, a company increases its assets thanks to the cash that comes in. But since equity equals assets minus total debt, a company decreases its equity by increasing debt. In other words, when debt increases, equity shrinks, and since equity is the ROE's denominator, ROE, in turn, gets a boost. At the same time, when a company takes on debt, the total assets - the denominator of ROA - increase. So, debt amplifies ROE in relation to ROA.

Ed's balance sheet should reveal why the company's return on equity and return on assets were so different. The carpet-maker carried an enormous amount of debt - which kept its assets high while reducing shareholders' equity. In 2009, it had total liabilities that exceeded $422 billion - more than 16 times its total shareholders' equity of $25.268 billion.

Because ROE weighs net income only against owners' equity, it doesn't say much about how well a company uses its financing from borrowing and bonds. Such a company may deliver an impressive ROE without actually being more effective at using the shareholders' equity to grow the company. ROA - because its denominator includes both debt and equity - can help you see how well a company puts both these forms of financing to use.


Conclusion
So, be sure to look at ROA as well as ROE. They are different, but together they provide a clear picture of management's effectiveness. If ROA is sound and debt levels are reasonable, a strong ROE is a solid signal that managers are doing a good job of generating returns from shareholders' investments. ROE is certainly a “hint” that management is giving shareholders more for their money. On the other hand, if ROA is low or the company is carrying a lot of debt, a high ROE can give investors a false impression about the company's fortunes.

by Ben McClure (Contact Author | Biography)

Ben McClure is a long-time contributor to Investopedia.com.

Ben is the director of Bay of Thermi Limited, an independent research and consulting firm that specializes in preparing early stage ventures for new investment and the marketplace. He works with a wide range of clients in the North America, Europe and Latin America. Ben was a highly-rated European equities analyst at London-based Old Mutual Securities, and led new venture development at a major technology commercialization consulting group in Canada. He started his career as writer/analyst at the Economist Group. Mr. McClure graduated from the University of Alberta's School of Business with an MBA.

Ben's hard and fast investing philosophy is that the herd is always wrong, but heck, if it pays, there's nothing wrong with being a sheep.

He lives in Thessaloniki, Greece. You can learn more about Bay of Thermi Limited atwww.bayofthermi.com.

Filed Under: Accounting, Fundamental Analysis, Investing Basics, Stock Analysis, Stocks

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/05/052005.asp

Warren Buffett believes that the return that a company gets on its equity is one of the most important factors in making successful stock investments.

Warren Buffett believes that the return that a company gets on its equity is one of the most important factors in making successful stock investments.

DEFINING EQUITY

Benjamin Graham defines stockholders equity as:

‘The interest of the stockholders in a company as measured by the capital and surplus.’

CALCULATING OWNER’S EQUITY

Investors can think of stockholders equity like this. An investor who buys a business for $100,000 has an equity of $100,000 in that investment. This sum represents the total capital provided by the investor.

If the investor then makes a net profit each year from the business of $10,000, the return on equity is 10%:

10,000 x 100
  100,000

If however the investor has borrowed $50,000 from a bank and pays an annual amount of interest to the bank of $3500, the calculations change. The total capital in the business remains at $100,000 but the equity in the business (the capital provided by the investor) is now only $50,000 ($100,000 - $50,000).

The profit figures also change. The net profit now is only $6500 ($10,000 - $3,500).

The return on capital (total capital employed, equity plus debt) remains at 10%. The return on equity is different and higher. It is now 13%:

6,500 x 100
 50,000

The approach to financing its operations by a company can obviously affect the returns on equity shown by that company.

WHY WARREN BUFFETT THINKS THAT RETURN ON EQUITY IS IMPORTANT

Just as a 10% return on a business is, all other things being equal, better than a 5% return, so too with corporate rates of returns on equity. Also, a higher return on equity means that surplus funds can be invested to improve business operations without the owners of the business (stockholders) having to invest more capital. It also means that there is less need to borrow.

WHAT RATE OF RETURN ON EQUITY DOES WARREN BUFFETT LOOK FOR?

This is a fluctuating requirement. The benchmarks are the return on prime quality bonds and the average rate of returns of companies in the market. In 1981, Buffett identified the average rate of return on equity of American companies at 11%, so an intelligent investor would like more than that, substantially more, preferably. Bond rates change, so the long-term average bond rate must be considered, when viewing a long-term investment.

In 1972, Buffett implied that a rate of return on equity of at least 14% was desirable. Although, at times, Warren Buffett has appeared to downplay the importance of Return on Equity, he constantly refers to a high rate of return as a basic investment principle.

COMPANY RATES OF RETURN ON EQUITY

It is significant that the majority of companies in the Berkshire Hathaway portfolio in 2002 all had higher than average returns on equity over a ten-year period. For example:

Coca Cola	45.05
American Express	20.19
Gillette	40.43

INVESTMENT DANGERS

There can be dangers in averaging returns over a long period. A company might start with high rates which then fall away, but still have a healthy average. Conversely, a company might be going in the opposite direction. As Warren Buffett looks for predictability in a company’s earnings, one would imagine that he would favour companies who increase their ROE or which have consistent levels.

COMPANY ANNUAL RATES OF RETURN

Compare the annual rates of return on equity of the following companies, using summary figures provided by Value Line.

Year	Coca Cola	Gap Inc	Wal-Mart Stores
1993	47.7	22.9	21.7
1994	48.8	23.3	21.1
1995	55.4	21.6	18.6
1996	56.7	27.4	17.8
1997	56.5	33.7	19.1
1998	42	52.4	21
1999	34	50.5	22.1
2000	39.4	30	20.1
2001	35	4.3	19.1
2002	35	13.1	20.4

RETURN ON CAPITAL IS VERY IMPORTANT

The example early on this page shows that debt financing can be used to increase the rate of return on equity. This can be misleading and also problematical if interest rates rise or fall. This is probably one reason why Warren Buffett prefers companies with little or no debt. The rate of return on equity is a true one and future earnings are less unpredictable. A careful investor like Buffett would always take rates of return on total capital into account. The average rates of return of capital in the companies referred to above in Berkshire Hathaway portfolio are:

Coca Cola	39.12
American Express	13.68
Gillette	25.93

A comparison of the rates of return on equity and capital for these three companies is significant and the reader can make their own calculations.

http://www.buffettsecrets.com/return-on-equity.htm