"High Priced" versus "Low Priced" stocks

High Priced stocks may be undervalued

Frequently the highest per share prices represent the lowest total valuation for a company when price is multiplied by shares outstanding and compared with total earning power and other figures.


Why high priced stocks can be favourable?

I generally favour issues selling at high prices per share.

They are more often to be in the rapid-growth stage.

They are likely to have a better-grade following.

Think possible profits on percentage basis

One should regard one's possible profits more on a percentage basis than on an absolute dollar basis.

A move to $10 from $5, is $5, but certainly no one would think a move to $130 from $125, meant the same thing.

Traders will not see anything dangerous in the doubling of a low-priced share to 10, from 5, though they will avoid, fear, and occasionally, even sell short a stock that moves to 175 from 125, or $50, when an issue in that class actually would have to rise to $250 to double.

It is quite useful to have a logarithmic chart just as a reminder. 

A "log" chart shows such movements in proper scale and tends to temper the judgement.



High-Priced stocks very occasionally can be available at low prices

Very occasionally, once in a good many years, normally high-priced stocks can be bought for low prices. 

This is so obviously advantageous, if one has the cash at the time and the foresight.



Low Priced stocks with small capitalizations

Sometimes one can buy low-priced stocks of companies that also have small capitalizations, and realise some very amazing profits.  

However, it should be realised that the possibilities of selecting one of the few a make good, and selecting it at the right time, are quite slight.



Low-Priced stocks with large capitalizations

Low -priced shares with huge capitalizations are usually quite undesirable.

What are the 3 financial risks in an investment?

What causes financial risks in an investment?

1.  Excessive debt
"Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked."  - Warren Buffett. 
Companies incur debts because they want to speed up time.  They can own assets now instead of waiting for them later.  Why is speeding up time a bad thing?
These are often the companies and people with a lot of debts when the market collapses.

2.  Overpaying for an investment.
Price is what you pay.  Value is what you get.  - Warren Buffett
The asset quality has not changed.  The market conditions has not changed.  The poor investment was based on the initial price paid, not the quality of the asset.  The investor overpaid to own the asset or stock.

3.  Not knowing what you're doing.
"Risk comes from not knowing what you're doing." - Warren Buffett.
Why do people value the ownership of a house but not value the ownership of a company?
People understand how to value a house.  Many people do not understand how to value a company or stock.  They definitely do not understand the value of the company when they are broken down into many shares.  So, that is the true risk here and if you are the type of person who buys company shares and never look at what they are worth and buying on the basis that "well I like this company", you are probably setting up yourself up for buying too high above the true value of the share.

Good quality company but trading at high price - Add this to your "watch list."

If the price is too high, you should add the company to your "watch list."  You have found the company to be a good quality company but the price is too high.  If it's much too high, put it on your "watch list" and wait for it to come down.

In rare circumstances, you may wish to put in a market order; but you will not want to do this in every case.

The "buy price" is the price at which both your risk and reward criteria are met.  This is the highest price you can pay and realize both a Total Return that will double your money every five years and where the risk of loss is less than one third of the potential gain.

The reward should be at least three times the risk.  Even though you may sometimes accept a total return of less than 15% because of the contribution that the stock can make to your portfolio's stability, you don't want to accept a Risk index of much above 25%.

If the Risk index is zero or negative, you should question your assumptions about the quality issues.  You will want to question why the price of the stock is so low.  What do others know about the company that you don't know?  If you're a new investor, you should move on to another candidate.  If you can satisfy yourself that the price is depressed for no good reason, then you can be a contrarian and buy the stock.


Additional note:

Definition of 'Market Order'

An order that an investor makes through a broker or brokerage service to buy or sell an investment immediately at the best available current price. A market order is the default option and is likely to be executed because it does not contain restrictions on the buy/sell price or the timeframe in which the order can be executed.

A market order is also sometimes referred to as an "unrestricted order."

Investopedia explains 'Market Order'

A market order guarantees execution, and it often has low commissions due to the minimal work brokers need to do. Be wary of using market orders on stocks with a low average daily volume: in such market conditions the ask price can be a lot higher than the current market price (resulting in a large spread). In other words, you may end up paying a whole lot more than you originally anticipated! It is much safer to use a market order on high-volume stocks.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketorder.asp#ixzz2FjYO8xoI



Calculating the Risk Index

Risk Index
= (Current Price - Potential Low Price) / (Potential High Price - Potential Low Price)

The result is the risk index, the percentage of the deal that is risk.
We look for a risk index of 25 percent or less, meaning that only a quarter of the proposition or less is risk.
We would then have at least 75 percent to gain versus at most 25 percent to lose; so the reward is at least three times the risk.

What should you do if you find that the price or P/E is significantly above or below the historically fair price or fair P/E mark?

"It is better to buy a wonderful company at fair price than a fair company at wonderful price."

In general, if you can buy a quality stock today for a historically fair price or fair P/E, you should probably do so, provided the reward and risk are attractive.

However, what should you do if you find that the price or P/E is significantly above or below the historically fair price or fair P/E mark?

A low price or low P/E is probably your biggest concern, because it suggests that people who are buying the stock today might know something negative about the company that you don't know.

Think about it.  Why would investors pay less for the stock than it has typically sold for?

• Is there something in the news that you haven't heard about?  
• Has an analyst - or have a number of analysts - announced a reduced expectation of future earnings based upon something they know that you don't know?  
• Have you missed something in your quality analysis - or (shame on you!) recklessly jumped over that barbed-wire fence, failing to evaluate quality deliberately enough before moving on to look at the value considerations? 

(E.g. Transmile, KNM).

If the price or P/E is too low - move on to another company and forget about looking at the risk and reward.  You may miss a few good stocks, but you won't have to lose any sleep worrying about being wrong.



If the price or P/E ratio is too high, this tells you two things.

1. The first is that other investors appear to agree with you about the quality issues, because they are paying a healthy price for the stock.  
2. The second is that it may be too healthy a price.  

• You may want to put off buying it until the price becomes more reasonable.  
• Or, it may be worth the premium if the risk and reward are satisfactory.

(E.g. _____________)

Just know that, if you buy a stock whose price or P/E is too far above the fair price or fair P/E, when it later comes back down - which it usually will - the decrease in P/E can reduce your gain considerably.  Your chances of having a superior portfolio are far better if you select stocks for which you don't have to make any allowances.  


As you gain more experience, you'll find that you can make some intelligent exceptions in cases of high or low price or P/E, but for now, the advice for those who are just starting out, don't.

Stock Investing is not Rocket Science!

The test of real expertise is wealth protection in bad times and solid growth in good times. So that, over a longer horizon covering boom and bust, you get attractive growth, say 20% CAGR. Of course there are a few rare, real experts (but you won’t see them on TV every day, predicting the market) who have consistently been doing this. Each Stock Shastra is the distilled wisdom of such rare, real experts. The real Gurus! And from them, here is Stock Shastra #1: Stock Investing is not Rocket Science! Now, how do you feel when you say this Shastra?

• Benjamin Graham, one of the Gurus of stock investing, did not have a background of finance when he started investing. However, he learnt stock investing, eventually pioneering the concept of value investing; his philosophy was simple: Buy great businesses at extremely cheap prices.
• Warren Buffett, one of the greatest stock investors of all time, started investing when he was 12, without any formal finance education. He regarded Benjamin Graham as his Guru and today is amongst the richest people in the world.
• The common thread binding these great investors is the same. They weren’t experts when they started. But they learnt to do it on their own by following a simple and sound framework of investing and sticking to it with discipline.
• It involved buying into a great business with the mindset of an owner. Finding such a business might require some search and analysis, but is something you can certainly manage.
• Most importantly, sooner or later, the market gives you many opportunities to buy such wonderful businesses at throw-away prices; or sell your holdings at unbelievably high prices. The proof: Look at the 52-week Highs and lows of any of the Sensex stocks.

Once we change our mindset and decide to invest in stocks on our own, the next step is to find a wonderful business worth owning. The next Stock Shastra will tell you how to start doing this.

http://stockshastra.moneyworks4me.com/stock-shastra-1/

Buffett: In my early days I, too, rejoiced when the market rose. Now, low prices became my friend.

Buffett highlights the irrational reaction of many investors to changes in stock prices.


Today, IBM has 1.16 billion shares outstanding, of which we own about 63.9 million or 5.5%.  Naturally, what happens to the company’s earnings over the next five years is of enormous importance to us.  Beyond that, the company will likely spend $50 billion or so in those years to repurchase shares. Our quiz for the day: What should a long-term shareholder, such as Berkshire, cheer for during that period?

I won’t keep you in suspense. We should wish for IBM’s stock price to languish throughout the five years.

----



The logic is simple: If you are going to be a net buyer of stocks in the future, either directly with your own money or indirectly (through your ownership of a company that is repurchasing shares), you are hurt when stocks rise. You benefit when stocks swoon. Emotions, however, too often complicate the matter:

• Most people, including those who will be net buyers in the future, take comfort in seeing stock prices advance. 
• These shareholders resemble a commuter who rejoices after the price of gas increases, simply because his tank contains a day’s supply.

Charlie and I don’t expect to win many of you over to our way of thinking – we’ve observed enough human behavior to know the futility of that – but we do want you to be aware of our personal calculus. And here
a confession is in order: In my early days I, too, rejoiced when the market rose. Then I read Chapter Eight of Ben Graham’s The Intelligent Investor, the chapter dealing with how investors should view fluctuations in stock prices. Immediately the scales fell from my eyes, and low prices became my friend. Picking up that book was one of the luckiest moments in my life.

In the end, the success of our IBM investment will be determined primarily by its future earnings. But an important secondary factor will be how many shares the company purchases with the substantial sums it is likely to devote to this activity. And if repurchases ever reduce the IBM shares outstanding to 63.9 million,  I will abandon my famed frugality and give Berkshire employees a paid holiday. 

-----


When Berkshire buys stock in a company that is repurchasing shares, we hope for two events:

• First, we have the normal hope that earnings of the business will increase at a good clip for a long time to come; and 
• second, we also hope that the stock underperforms in the market for a long time as well. A corollary to this second point: “Talking our book” about a stock we own – were that to be effective – would actually be harmful to Berkshire, not helpful as commentators customarily assume.

http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2011ltr.pdf

Investors should expect prices to fluctuate

The Relevance of Temporary Price Fluctuations

In addition to the probability of permanent loss attached to investment, there is also the possibility of interim price fluctuations that are unrelated to underlying value.

Many investors consider price fluctuations to be a significant risk:  if the price goes down, the investment is seen as risky regardless of the fundamentals.

But are temporary price fluctuations really a risk?

• Not in the way that permanent value impairments are and 
• then only for certain investors in specific situations.

It is, of course, not always easy for investors to distinguish temporary price volatility, related to the short-term forces of supply and demand, from price movements related to business fundamentals.  The reality may only become apparent after the fact.

While investors should obviously try to avoid overpaying for investments or buying into businesses that subsequently decline in value due to deteriorating results, it is not possible to avoid random short-term market volatility.  

Indeed, investors should expect prices to fluctuate and should not invest in securities if they cannot tolerate some volatility.

Avoiding loss should be the primary goal of every investor

Warren Buffett likes to say that the first rule of investing is "Don't lose money," and the second rule is, "Never forget the first rule." I too believe that avoiding loss should be the primary goal of every investor. This does not mean that investors should never incur the risk of any loss at all. Rather "don't lose money" means that over several years an investment portfolio should not be exposed to appreciable loss of principal.

While no one wishes to incur losses, you couldn't prove it from an examination of the behavior of most investors and speculators. The speculative urge that lies within most of us is strong; the prospect of a free lunch can be compelling, especially when others have already seemingly partaken. It can be hard to concentrate on potential losses while others are greedily reaching for gains and your broker is on the phone offering shares in the latest "hot" initial public offering. Yet the avoidance of loss is the surest way to ensure a profitable outcome.

A loss-avoidance strategy is at odds with recent conventional market wisdom. Today many people believe that risk comes, not from owning stocks, but from not owning them. Stocks as a group, this line of thinking goes, will outperform bonds or cash equivalents over time, just as they have in the past. Indexing is one manifestation of this view. The tendency of most institutional investors to be fully invested at all times is another.

There is an element of truth to this notion; stocks do figure to outperform bonds and cash over the years. Being junior in a company's capital structure and lacking contractual cash flows and maturity dates, equities are inherently riskier than debt instruments. In a corporate liquidation, for example, the equity only receives the residual after all liabilities are satisfied.  To persuade investors to venture into equities rather than safer debt instruments, they must be enticed by the prospect of higher returns. However, the actual risk of a particular investment cannot be determined from historical data. It depends on the price paid. If enough investors believe the argument that equities will offer the best long-term returns, they may pour money into stocks, bidding prices up to levels at which they no longer offer the superior returns. The risk of loss stemming from equity's place in the capital structure is exacerbated by paying a higher price.

A Pricey P/E

High Pricey P/E

A company may be selling at an exceptionally high P/E because it is considered to have remarkably good prospects for growth.

No matter how high the quality of the car you are looking at, there is a price at which it is no longer worth buying.  No matter how junky a car is, there is a price at which it is a bargain.  Stocks are no different.

Some stocks with high multiples work out, but investors who consistently buy high multiple stocks are likely to lose money in the long run.

Often the highest multiples are present in a bull market which increases the risk.  

Graham and Dodd observed, " It is a truism to say that the more impressive the record and the more promising the prospects of stability and growth, the more liberally the per-share earnings should be valued, subject always to our principle that a multiplier higher than 20 (i.e., 'earning basis' of less than 5%) will carry the issue out of the investment range."

It is not wrong to pay more, Graham and Dodd noted; it is simply that doing so enters the realm of speculation.

Price-Earning Ratio 101

What actually is PER?

It's often said that the PER is an estimate of the number of years it'll take investors to recoup their money. Unless all profits are paid out as dividends, something that rarely persists in real life, this is incorrect.

So ignore what you might read in simplistic articles and note this down: a PER is a reflection not of what you earn from a stock, but “what investors as a group are prepared to pay for the earnings of a company”.

All things being equal, the lower the PER, the better. 


But the list of caveats is long and vital to understand if you're to make full use of this metric.

PER:  Historical versus Forward or Forecast PER

The PER compares the current price of a stock with the prior year's (historical) or the current year's (forecast) earnings per share (EPS). Usually the prior year's EPS is used, but be sure to check first.

For example:

Last financial year, XYZ Ltd made $8 million in net profit (or earnings). 

The company has 1 million shares outstanding.

So it achieved earnings per share (EPS) of $8.00 ($8 million profit divided by 1 million shares). 

In the current year, XYZ is expected to earn $10 million; a forecast EPS of $10.00.

• At the current share price of $100, the stock is therefore trading on a historic PER of 12.5 ($100/$8). 
• Using the forecast for current year's earnings, the forward or “forecast PER” is 10 ($100/$10).

Quality has a price to match

Quality usually comes with a price to match. 


It costs more, for example, to buy handcrafted leather goods from France than it does a cheap substitute from China. Stocks are no different: high quality businesses generally, and rightfully, trade on higher PERs than poorer quality businesses.





Low PER doesn't alone guarantee quality business

• Value investors love a bargain. Indeed, they're defined by this quality. 
• But whilst a low PER for a quality business can indicate value, it doesn't alone guarantee it. 
• Because PERs are only a shortcut for valuation, further research is mandatory.
• 
  

High PER with strong future earnings growth maybe a bargain

• Likewise, a high PER doesn't ensure that a stock is expensive. 
• A company with strong future earnings growth may justify a high PER, and may even be a bargain. 
• A stock with temporarily depressed profits, especially if caused by a one-off event, may justifiably trade at a high PER. 
• But for a poor quality business with little prospects for growth, a high PER is likely to be undeserved.

Avoid a Common trap: Use underlying or normalised earnings in PER


There's another trap: PERs are often calculated using reported profit, especially in newspapers or on financial websites. 


But one-off events often distort headline profit numbers and therefore the PER. 


Using underlying, or “normalised”, earnings in your PER calculation is likely to give a truer picture of a stock's value.





What is a normalised level of earnings?

That begs the question; what is a normal level of earnings? That's the $64 million dollar question.


 If you don't know how to calculate these figures for the stocks in your portfolio, now is the time to establish whether it's skill or luck that's driving your returns. And if you don't know that, history may well make a monkey of you.




An old encounter with low PE stock: Hai-O


It is nostalgic to re-read an old post on Hai-O by ze Moola. 

http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2008/04/more-on-haio.html

Sunday, April 13, 2008
MORE ON HAIO

My dearest BullBear,

A low PE stock means only one thing and that is the stock is trading on a lower valuation compared to what it is currently earning.

Some simply consider that what is happening is the stock is being ignored in the market despite its impressive earnings.

Why?

The market could be wrong and that perhaps this is a stock that's an ignored gem. Yeah, the classical hidden gem and if this is the case, investors who invests in the stock could be rewarded for their stock selection.

However, on the other hand, sometimes the market could be right and that they do sense something is not right within the stock.

And because of this reasoning, I have always realised that a low PE stock does not make a stock a QUALITY stock.

It just means the stock is trading 'cheaply'.

It could be a bargain but it could also be a trap.

Buffett (1982): Always maintain strict price disciple; a too-high purchase price for the stock of an excellent company can undo the effects of a subsequent decade of favorable business developments.

While the world of stocks seems to be tearing apart on US subprime woes, what could be better than to indulge in some thought provoking lessons that can help you, as an investor, in staying calm in such situations of panic.  We saw Buffett (the master) talk about his policies for making acquisitions and how managers tend to overestimate themselves. Let us see what the investing genius had to offer in his 1982 letter to shareholders.

In what was probably a bull market, Berkshire Hathaway, the master's investment vehicle faced a peculiar problem. By that time, the company had acquired meaningful stakes in a lot of other companies but not meaningful enough for these companies' earnings to be consolidated with that of Berkshire Hathaway's. This is because accounting conventions then allowed only for dividends to be recorded in the earnings statement of the acquiring company if it acquired a stake of less than 20%. This obviously did not go down well with the master as earnings of Berkshire in the 'accounting sense' depended upon the percentage of earnings that were distributed by these companies as dividends.

"We prefer a concept of 'economic' earnings that includes all undistributed earnings, regardless of ownership percentage. In our view, the value to all owners of the retained earnings of a business enterprise is determined by the effectiveness with which those earnings are used - and not by the size of one's ownership percentage."

As for some examples in the Indian context, companies like M&M and Tata Chemicals, which hold small stakes in many companies should not be valued based on what dividends these companies pay to M&M and Tata Chemicals but instead one should arrive at the fair value of these companies independently and that value should be attributed on a pro-rata basis to all the shareholders, whether minority or majority.

While the master tackled accounting related issues in the first few portions of the 1982 letter, the next few portions were once again devoted to the excesses that take place in the market time and again. This is what he had to say on corporate acquisitions and price discipline.

"As we look at the major acquisitions that others made during 1982, our reaction is not envy, but relief that we were non-participants. For in many of these acquisitions, managerial intellect wilted in competition with managerial adrenaline. The thrill of the chase blinded the pursuers to the consequences of the catch. Pascal's observation seems apt: 'It has struck me that all men's misfortunes spring from the single cause that they are unable to stay quietly in one room.'"

He further goes on to state, "The market, like the Lord, helps those who help themselves. But, unlike the Lord, the market does not forgive those who know not what they do. For the investor, a too-high purchase price for the stock of an excellent company can undo the effects of a subsequent decade of favorable business developments."

The above comments once again bring to the fore a strict discipline that the master employs when it comes to paying an appropriate price. In fact, as much as his success is built on finding some very good picks like Coca Cola and Gillette, he has never had to sustain huge losses on any of his investment. The math is simple, if you lose say 50% on an investment, to make good these losses, one will have to unearth a stock that will have to rise at least 100% and that too in quick time. A very difficult task indeed! No wonder the master pays so much attention to maintaining a strict price discipline.

http://www.equitymaster.com/detail.asp?date=8/2/2007&story=5

Investment merit at a given PRICE but not at another

Investment Policies (Based on Benjamin Graham)

PRICE: is frequently an essential element, so that a stock (and even a bond) may have investment merit at one price level but not at another.

______________________________________

Having selected the company to invest based on various parameters, the next consideration will be the price we are willing to pay for owning part of its business.

Price is always an important consideration in investing. At a certain price, the company can be acquired at a bargain, at a fair price or at a high price. Each scenario will impact on our investment returns.

We should ALWAYS buy a good quality company at a BARGAIN PRICE (margin of safety). This allows us to lock in our potential gains at the time of buying at a favourable reward/risk ratio. This maybe when the upside gain: downside loss is at least 3:1.

There maybe FEW exceptional occasions when we may be willing to pay a FAIR PRICE for a good quality company. This is often the case when a good quality company is fancied by many investors and is often quoted in normal time at a high price.

However, we should NEVER (NEVER, NEVER) buy a good quality company at HIGH PRICE, whatever its earnings and growth prospects maybe. To do so will not only diminishes our potential investment returns, but may even results in a loss of our capital due to the unfavourable reward/risk ratio.

Don't time the market, it is difficult. However, there will be time when the market is on sale and the prices of stocks are at a bargain and there will be time when the market is exuberant and the prices of stocks are high or very high.

The market will always be there and we should choose when to buy and when to sell. We should only buy a stock when the PRICE IS RIGHT FOR US and sell a stock when the PRICE IS RIGHT FOR US.


(What is market timing? Timing is a term that refers to investing by buying everything or selling everything on the basis of the (faulty) assumption that one can predict the market's next move. Attempts to time are common, but academicians and practitioners have concluded that success happens through luck only on occasions that are quickly reversed and very costly.)

Growth Stocks: Searching for the Sprinters

Growth Stocks: Searching for the Sprinters

by Douglas Gerlach

Investors who focus on growth try to predict which companies will grow faster in the future -- faster than the rest of the stocks in the market, or faster than other stocks in the same industry. If you're successful in buying a company that does grow faster than other companies, then it's likely that the price of that company's stock will increase as well, and you can make a profit.
(My comment: Provided you did not pay too high a price to buy it.)

The stock of a company that grows its earnings and revenues faster than average is known as a growth stock. These companies usually pay few or no dividends, since they prefer to reinvest their profits in their business.

Peter Lynch primarily used a growth stock approach in managing the Magellan mutual fund. Individuals who invest in growth stocks often prefer it because their portfolio will be made up of established, well-managed companies that can be held onto for many years. Companies like Coca-Cola, IBM, and Microsoft have demonstrated great growth over the years, and are the cornerstones of many portfolios. Most investment clubs stick to growth stocks as well.