This is a very good thing.

Keeping a long-term perspective will continue to be the key to success.

As long as you have picked a long-term strategy that makes sense and you believe in.

Which company is cheaper? (Understanding P/E, Earnings yield and EBIT/EV.)

Consider two companies, Company A and Company B.

They are actually the same company (i.e. the same sales, the same operating earnings, the same everything) except that Company A has no debt and Company B has $50 in debt (at a 10% interest rate).

All information is per share

Company A

Sales                     $100
EBIT                         10
Interest expense          0
Pretax Income           10
Taxes @ 40%             4
Net Income               $6


Company B

Sales                     $100
EBIT                         10
Interest expense           5
Pretax Income             5
Taxes @ 40%             2
Net Income               $3


The price of Company A is $60 per share.
The price of Company B is $10 per share.

Which is cheaper?

P/E of Company A is 10 ($60/6 = 10).  The E/P or earnings yield, of Company A is 10% (6/60).
P/E of Company B is 3.33 ($10/3 = 3.33). The E/P or earnings yield of Company B is 30% (3/10).

So which is cheaper?
Using P/E and earnings yield, Company B looks much cheaper than Company A.

So, is Company B clearly cheaper?


Let's look at EBIT/EV for both companies.

Company A
Enterprise value (Market price + debt)   60 + 0 = $60
EBIT   $10


Company B
Enterprise value (Market price + debt)   10 + 50 = $60
EBIT   $10

They are the same! Their EBIT/EV are the same.

To the buyer of the whole company, would it matter whether you paid $10 per share for the company and owed another $50 per share or you paid $60 and owed nothing?

It is the same thing!

*You would be buying $10 worth of EBIT for $60, either way!




Additional note:

* For example, whether you pay $200k for a building and assume a $800k mortgage or pay $1 million up front, it should be the same to you.  The building costs $1 million either way!

[Using EBIT/EV as your earnings yield provide a better picture than E/P, of how cheap or expensive the asset is.]

Pretax operating earnings or EBIT (earnings before interest and taxes) was used in place of reported earnings because companies operate with different levels of debt and differing tax rates. Using EBIT allowed us to view and compare the operating earnings of different companies without the distortions arising from the differences in tax rates and debt levels.  For each company, it was then possible to compare actual earnings from operations (EBIT) to the cost of the assets used to produce those earnings (tangible capital employed) and to the price you are paying.

Returns on Capital
= EBIT / (Net Working Capital + Net Fixed Assets)

Earnings Yield
= EBIT / EV
= EBIT / Enterprise Value

As an investor, you are looking for companies with high Returns on Capital and selling for a bargain or high Earnings Yield (EBIT / EV).

REF:  The Little Book that still Beats the Market by Joel Greenblatt

Take risks (but protect yourself) - Peter Lim

Image Credit: futbolfinanzas.com

Much of Lim’s wealth was the product of an unlikely venture. His single investment of US$10 millionin Wilmar, an Indonesian palm oil startup, seemed far from promising in the late 90s, when Indonesia was facing political and social unrest. At the time, the currency fell from 2,500 to 16,000 rupiah against the US dollar. But against all odds, Wilmar began to pick up the pieces and Lim’s faith in the company paid off — in 2010, he cashed out his shares for US$1.5 billion.

“My Indonesian partner was asking me the other day: ‘How the hell did we make so much money?’

Up to a point after people tell you a story and a vision, don’t write it off. Sometimes it comes true. You just make sure that if it doesn’t come true, you don’t get hurt too much.”

(Source: The Business Times, AsiaOne News)

 https://sg.news.yahoo.com/8-wise-lessons-wealth-singapore-053251357.html

Comments:

1998. US$10 million
2010. US$1,500 million (1.5 billion)
Period 12 years

Compound Annual Growth Rate:
51.82%. (WoW.  )


2015.  US$ 3,000 million (3 billion). His present net worth.
CAGR from 2010 to 2015.  14.87%

CAGR from 1998 to 2015.  39.87%


He bought Wilmar in 1997/1998.
It was at the time of the Asian Financial Crisis.
Prices of stocks were very low.
Indonesian currency and regional currencies were at historical lows compared to US dollars and Singapore dollars.
He made a big investment.  (Fat pitch when the opportunity came.)
He was in the position to make this investment and he took the risk, knowing his downside was protected. (My analysis.) (Luck = preparation + ability to seize opportunity when this presents)
He stayed with the company long term (12 years).
He cashed out in 2010. (Perfect timing or pricing.  How did he do this?)
Since 2010, he has grown his wealth around 15% per year, doubling in 5 years.

There are many lessons one can learn from this investing behaviour of Peter Lim (almost sounds like Peter Lynch).  :-)



For references.
CAGR
61.41%      (Land - short term frenzyl)
8.14%        (Property capital appreciation)
9.75%        (Plantation capital appreciation)
17.79%       (Land - long term)
9.65%         (Property Total Return)
10.61%       (Plantation Total Return)
15%+          (Equity)
Unlimited     (Business)

Investing in decline

British American Tobacco (BATS) published a gargantuan number this week: CAD$15.6bn (£8.2bn). Unfortunately, this has nothing to do with its financial results - the group made pre-tax profit of £4.8bn last year - but is instead the amount awarded to smokers by a Canadian court for "moral and punitive damages". BATS' Canadian subsidiary is liable for two-thirds of the sum.

Shareholders need not fret yet: the legal battle has already been rumbling on for 10 years, and the three tobacco companies inculpated will challenge the judge's ruling. The public smoking bans and tax increases introduced in countries ranging from Brazil through the Philippines to Turkey are of more immediate consequence. Manufacturers used to rely on emerging markets to offset falling volumes in Europe and North America, but this growth engine has stalled.

The latest government crackdown is in China, the world's largest cigarette market. On the same day as the Canadian legal judgement, Beijing banned smoking in restaurants, public transport and offices - the strictest restrictions yet introduced in the country. The direct impact on BATS and Imperial Tobacco (IMT) will be limited, as the Chinese market is virtually monopolised by China National Tobacco Corporation (although BATS did launch a joint venture with CNTC in 2013). But the move does highlight the direction of travel across the developing world.

But the fascinating thing about tobacco companies is just how successful they have been at managing decline. In 2006, BATS sold 691bn cigarettes and was worth £29.6bn on New Year's Eve. In 2014, it sold 667bn fags and attracted a year-end market valuation of £65.2bn. The figures for Imperial Tobacco show the same pattern. For investors, this is a very instructive contradiction.

Tobacco groups have wrung growth out of a shrinking market in three ways. 

1.  Firstly and most importantly, they have continually increased prices. This has worked because demand for cigarettes is infamously 'inelastic': consumers pay up even if prices rise. Moreover, in many countries the price of a packet of cigarettes consists mainly of tax. In Britain a full 77 per cent of the typical price of a premium packet is paid to the government, according to the industry lobby group. Mathematically, that means manufacturers can increase their prices by 5 per cent without pushing the total packet price up by much more than 1 per cent.

For example, in the first quarter BATS reported a particularly disappointing 3.6 per cent decline in volumes, led by shrinking markets in Brazil, Russia and Vietnam. Yet revenues at constant exchange rates rose 1.7 per cent, "driven by strong pricing, in part due to price increases in high-inflation markets".

There is a parallel here with the big brewers, notably SABMiller(SAB). Investors need not be too concerned by flat volumes, because consumers pay up for beer in the same way they pay up for cigarettes. SAB's lager volumes showed no underlying growth in the year to 31 March, but the company still delivered organic top-line growth of 5 per cent.

2.   The second key strategy for countering industry decline is consolidation. The most recent mega deal is the acquisition of Lorillard, the number three cigarette group in the US, by Reynolds, the number two. To placate the anti-trust authorities, the companies agreed to sell various brands to Imperial Tobacco, the number four, for $7.1bn (£4.7bn). The regulator finally blessed this ménage à trois last month, although the deal has yet to formally complete. Lower-profile 'bolt-on' acquisitions are more common. BATS this week announced the purchase of TDR, the market leader in Croatia and a player in other Balkan states, for €550m (£395m).

Such deals are a vehicle for cost-cutting, which boosts profits even if top-line growth is sluggish. Imperial Tobacco in particular has a strong track record for extracting value from deals. Thanks to a seemingly endless programme of cost savings - aided by advertising bans - the operating margin in its tobacco business reached an astonishing 44 per cent in the six months to March.

3.   Finally, cigarette companies have been buying into new technology: cigarette alternatives. In 2013 BATS launched the UK's first e-cigarette brand, Vype, while the Reynolds-Lorillard merger will bring Imperial Tobacco blu, a rival brand. Here the parallel is with the oil majors and their flirtations with clean energy. This month the key European players tried to stress their green credentials by writing a high-profile open letter to the UN in support of a carbon-pricing system.

Cigarette and oil alternatives make headlines and allow producers to brag about corporate social responsibility and growth. But they are a very, very long way from paying for the dividends that have long underpinned the investment case for Britain's largest companies. Fortunately, the lesson of big tobacco is that decline can be managed successfully for much longer than one might think.

 By Stephen Wilmot , 03 June 2015

http://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/2015/06/03/comment/chronic-investor-blog/investing-in-decline-g0QBVswahNlGhiO1XtymXK/article.html

The graph that shows Chinese shares are in a bubble

The Shanghai market has more than doubled in a year, while another crucial measure suggests investor demand is unsustainable

A lot of attention has been focused on the Chinese stock market recently following its spectacular rise. The SSE Composite, the main index for the Shanghai exchange, has risen by about 140pc in the past year.

This has, naturally enough, given rise to fears of a bubble, although not all commentators are convinced. Using the popular "price to earnings" or p/e measure of value, the market is trading at about 20 times earnings, well below its previous high in 2007 of around 40 times. For comparison, the London market currently trades at about 15.5 times earnings.

• Chinese stock market hits seven year high

But one graph (below) has convinced investors at Monogram, a London-based fund manager, that the market is indeed in a bubble.

It plots the combined value of all the share trades placed in Shanghai each day and shows that the figure has risen hugely since 1997 but at a much greater pace over the past year or so. A yuan is worth about 10p, so shares worth about £83bn are currently being traded every day.

“If this is not a bubble then it’s hard to imagine what one looks like," said Paul Marson, Monogram's chief investment officer. "The average daily stock market turnover has increased 10-fold in the past year to 830bn yuan from 80bn."

He said the root cause was an increase in lending by China's banks, allied with increased appetite for shares as the Chinese property loses its appeal.

"An enormous amount of liquidity has gone from inflating the property market, which is now deflating, to inflating stock prices,” Mr Marson said.

He added: “This is a very unhealthy sign for the global economy. It can only end in tears. Bubbles always leave behind more problems than they resolved.”

• Tom Stevenson: China’s stock market bubble shows no sign of bursting yet

By Richard Evans

27 May 2015

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/investing/shares/11630704/The-graph-that-shows-Chinese-shares-are-in-a-bubble.html

Confused about what stocks to buy? The answer could be as medieval as moats

When deciding where to put money in the stock market, how can investors wade through the barrage of information and tell a great business from a poor one?

Look for moats.

That advice comes from Heather Brilliant and Elizabeth Collins of the investment research firm Morningstar Inc. Similar to the way medieval castles are protected by moats, investment-worthy companies have “economic moats,” or structural barriers that can fend off competitors and can earn high returns for many years, Brilliant and Collins write in their newly published book, “Why Moats Matter: The Morningstar Approach to Stock Investing.”

It’s a method that is based on a concept by billionaire investor Warren Buffett and one that Chicago-based Morningstar(Nasdaq: MORN) has used for many years as a basis for the firm’s successful stock-investing approach, the authors say. (Brilliant is co-chief executive of Morningstar Australasia and global head of equity and corporate credit research for Morningstar, and Collins is Morningstar’s director of equity research for North America.)

Now, with the book, Brilliant and Collins are looking to show investors how they themselves can find good stock picks and determine when to buy them.

"When you focus on a company's fundamental value relative to its stock price, and not on where the stock price is today relative to a month ago or a day ago or five minutes ago, you start to think like an owner rather than a trader,” Brilliant says. “It's this mindset that we believe is key to helping people become successful stock investors."

Collins says economic moats stem from five sources of competitive advantage:

Cost advantage, when a company has high profit margins and sustainably lower costs than competitors;
Intangible assets, such as brand recognition and patents that can keep competitors at bay;
Switching costs, the expenses in terms of time, hassle, money or risk a customer would incur if it switches to a competitor;
Efficient scale, when the company is in a limited market with few competitors;
Network effect, when the value of the good or service increases as the company wins more customers.

A company needs to have at least one of these elements to be considered to have an economic moat, says Collins.

“Companies with a moat have benefits that are so structural that it's inherently part of the business itself,” says Brilliant.

One example is computer technology company Oracle Corp. (NYSE: ORCL), which benefits from switching costs. Even though other software companies provide similar products and services, Redwood City, Calif.-based Oracle is deemed to have a wide moat because once its enterprise software is embedded into its clients’ systems, it is extremely difficult for the client to switch to another software provider.

“Even if something came along that was twice as good and half the price, the customer would have to think twice about switching because of the major disruption it would cause,” says Brilliant.

In contrast, Morningstar gives Apple Inc. only a narrow moat, mainly based on the switching cost of its operating system rather than its devices. Apple’s iOS may keep its users loyal, but as popular as iPhones and iPads are, it would be relatively easy for other companies to launch rival devices, the analysts say.

“We give Apple a narrow moat because the product cycle for devices and computers are still so fast,” says Brilliant.

Another company with a wide moat is San Jose, Calif.-based Ebay Inc. (Nasdaq: EBAY), which has a powerful network effect. It has not only become a leader in online auctions but also has expanded its business to payments through its acquisition of Paypal.

“Having both sides of the transaction was part of Ebay’s success,” says Brilliant. “As they grew, they became the obvious choice that nobody else could catch up.”

An example of a company that didn’t have that same network effect was Chicago-based Groupon Inc. (Nasdaq: GRPN).

“I love to talk about Groupon because that’s one where our moat methodology made it very clear from the very first day it was in existence that it was not a ‘moaty’ business,” says Brilliant. Even when Groupon’s stock was soaring, Morningstar held off on recommending it.

“We said, 'It doesn’t have a moat so it’s not going to last, and it ended up being the case, which is how our moat ratings work,” notes Brilliant. “It was very easy [for customers] to switch to Living Social, or other offerings, like Amazon. Groupon would’ve liked a network effect there, but we didn’t see it.”

In addition to determining economic moats, Morningstar’s analysts also give moat ratings to companies, which forecast whether a company will generate sustainable profits for a decade or more. “Moaty” businesses will be able to survive short-term fluctuations in stock prices and unpredictable changes in the market or industry.

So when the stock price falls on a company that has a moat, look at it as a buying opportunity.

“Each time your reevaluate your portfolio, think about the valuation question: Are the companies that I hold today undervalued, fairly valued or overvalued? Don’t put a discrete timeline on things. It all depends on the valuation and if it’s performing to expectation," Collins says.

Collins adds that there are two reasons to sell a stock. “One is that it’s no longer a compelling buying opportunity or has appreciated to the fair value estimate; the second is you no longer think the future is going to play out as you once did,” she says.

Understanding the value of a stock also requires looking beyond just the price. A $200 stock may sound expensive, but it may be a better value than a $20 stock that won’t bring you good returns.

“You’ll wait for a $500 pair of shoes to go on sale for $350,” says Brilliant. “In your mind, it's worth $500. But if you paid $350 for a $30 pair of shoes, you'd be feeling hugely ripped off. So it’s not really about the price; it’s about the underlying value of the item your buying."

Brilliant says the important thing to do as an investor is to focus on the long term and not get sucked in by the "movings" of the market at any given moment.

“Apply a framework like this and stick to it — because we know you’ll have better performance than following those waves in the market,” she says.

I-Chun Chen, Correspondent
Aug 26, 2014

http://www.bizjournals.com/bizwomen/news/profiles-strategies/2014/08/confused-about-what-stocks-to-buy-the-answer-could.html?page=all

Quick Guide to Reviewing Your Portfolio Holdings

Benchmarking performance and watching key metrics are essential to evaluating whether your retirement holdings are doing their job.

Adam Zoll23/02/15

Whether your retirement portfolio consists of dozens of holdings or just a few, from time to time, it is a good idea to assess how each is performing and to take a look under the bonnet.

That's why it is important to know which performance benchmarks and key metrics to use when sizing up each holding individually. In doing so, you should look at both past performance and forward-looking measures designed to provide guidance as to how the investment will perform moving forward. That way, you can determine whether things in your portfolio are ticking along just fine, a few upgrades are in order, or whether changes need to be made.

Take the Long View on Past Performance

The metric that investors tend to focus on most, of course, is total return, a backward-looking measure. But reviewing a holding's total return versus its benchmark and peer group requires a dose of perspective. For one thing, it's important not to place too much emphasis on near-term results. If a fund you own has performed poorly of late, try to understand why.

Perhaps the fund's manager has placed an outsized bet on a particular sector that has underperformed in the near term but is poised to rebound soon. Likewise, don't be lulled into overconfidence by near-term outperformance – today’s outperforming investment often becomes tomorrow's underperformer.

Remember that you're investing for a retirement that may be years – if not decades – away, depending on your age. If you're more than 10 years from retirement, you have time to ride out the market's ups and downs. If you're closer to retirement, you may want to ratchet down the risk; but you'll still need to have a good sense of how your holdings may perform once you stop working. Whatever your retirement time frame, focus on your holdings' performance over the trailing five- and 10-year periods, but also pay attention to how they've reacted in different market environments.

You could begin your analysis by focusing on 2008, when the financial meltdown sent stock prices plummeting and bond prices higher. But also look at 2013, when stocks posted strong gains while bonds languished.

Using Appropriate Metrics

Of course, your portfolio probably contains at least a few different asset types, meaning you'll need to pay attention to benchmarks and metrics that are most relevant to each type. For example, volatility and risk measures may be more important to you when it comes to your stock holdings, whereas interest-rate sensitivity probably matters more to you with regard to your bond holdings.

The following guide is designed to point you in the right direction when it comes to benchmarking the performance of various asset types and identifying other important metrics to watch. It's by no means a comprehensive list, but it's a good place to start.

Key forward-looking metrics

Morningstar Rating for stocks: Represents a stock's current trading price relative to our analyst team's assessment of its fair value price.

Stocks rated at 4 or 5 stars are trading meaningfully below their fair value estimates, meaning they appear to be undervalued, while those rated at 3 stars are fairly priced and those rated at 1 or 2 stars are trading above their fair value, meaning they appear to be overvalued.

Morningstar Economic Moat Rating: Analyst assessment of whether the company has one or more sustainable competitive advantages, with ratings ranging from wide to narrow to none.

Companies with economic moats tend to be better at sustaining profitability over time than those without them.

Key backward-looking metrics

Revenue growth: The amount of money the company brings in year over year, and a good indication of whether it is growing and to what degree.

Operating Margin:  A measure of company profitability. The wider the operating margin, the more the company makes on sales of its products or services.

Free Cash Flow: Another measure of company profitability, based on the firm's cash flow from operations minus its capital spending. 

https://my.morningstar.com/ap/news/134697/Quick-Guide-to-Reviewing-Your-Portfolio-Holdings.aspx

What Warren Buffett Looks for in a Company - Sustainable Competitive Advantage

What's the number-one attribute Warren Buffett, arguably one of the most successful investors in the world, looks for in a company? "Sustainable competitive advantage," he told an interviewer. If one of the most successful businessmen of today puts this at the top of his list, you should too.

Not only competitive advantage, as a term, widely overused, it is also widely misunderstood. You are not alone if you have ever wondered what a competitive advantage really is and what you do with it.

Here's the 30-second challenge to determine if you know your competitive advantage. Ready? Go. I meet you at one of the numerous local networking events and you introduce yourself "Hi, I'm Bob Jones with ABC Company." "Hi Bob. Nice to meet you. Tell me a little about your company. What is your company best at?"So what is it exactly? And if Buffett examined your company, would he find what he's looking for? Let's find out.

The 30-second competitive advantage challenge

… 29, 30. Time's up! Could you answer my question in less than 30 seconds, succinctly with clarity? If yes, skip this column. If not, don't worry, you are in good company. The majority of businesses are also trying to figure out what they are best at. Honestly this question is hard to answer. You have to narrow your focus more than you are comfortable with. By the end of this column, you will be able to share your competitive advantage with confidence.

What competitive advantage is and isn't

Often starting with what something isn't is easiest.

The management team from a mid-sized financial services group reported that its competitive advantages were: Your competitive advantage is not a list of your strengths. Not to down play strengths as these are important too. But if your competitive advantage(s) list is only comprised of strengths it is not a "competitive" advantage. Key word – competitive.  If you don't have a competitive advantage comprised of more than strengths, you don't compete. You exist.

• Good reputation in the community
• Skilled staff
• Outstanding team and well-respected leader
• Knowledgeable
• Strong client list and loyalty
• Flexible and responsive

Blah, blah, blah. Right? You've heard all this before and so have I. Couldn't you say this about most any professional service firm? This is what a competitive advantage is not. This is a list of strengths.

A competitive advantage is something you do that is unique. The key here is to compete you have to have a unique advantage. Looking at the list from the financial services firm above, you can see that this is not a list of unique stuff. Basically anyone in business today needs to achieve that level of competency just to be in the game.

Think of your competitive advantage as your organization's DNA – a collection of genes or assets that makes you unique. When you are true to your DNA, you are healthy, fit, and successful. When you compromise your DNA, you feel uncomfortable, slow and are exerting more effort than you should.

Your competitive advantage is what you, your company or your department does better than anyone else. The sustainable part refers to your ability to continue to do those things over a long period of time. And yes, you can have more than one advantage and you can develop advantages as well. You don't have to possess them all now.

The easiest way to find you competitive advantage is to answer these questions:

1. What is my company best at in my market?
2. Why?

By answering these questions, the financial services firm discovered the following are really its competitive advantages:

• Ranked in top 10 percent of money managers who beat S&P nationally
• Fastest-growing American Funds money manager in '00, '01, '02
• Only firm ever featured by American Funds in its advisory newsletter

Wow.  Doesn't that say a lot more than a good reputation and a skilled staff? This is the transition you need to make when explaining the competitive advantage of your organization or department. Here are a few more examples from businesspeople who answered the question "What is my company best at?"

• Sandy, an interior designer, determined she was best at increasing developers' sales ratio by 35 percent and was the only design team chosen by the top 10 luxury developers in the state.
• A clothing manufacturer named Joe said he was the best at wearable clothing because "Our clothes fly off the racks."
• The emergency service division of a county in Washington is the best at providing disaster management, response and recovery efforts for all agencies within its' service territory because of its skilled people and emergency response equipment.

Ref:  What Warren Buffett Looks for in a Company

Peter Lynch - Pearls on Investing for the Individual Investors *****

Published on Oct 16, 2012

In 1977, legendary fund manager Peter Lynch was named head of the then obscure Magellan Fund which had $18 million in assets. By the time Lynch resigned as a fund manager in 1990, the fund had grown to more than $14 billion in assets with more than 1,000 individual stock positions. From 1977 until 1990, the Magellan fund averaged a 29.2% return. This is exceptional considering how large the fund was. This video/audio is courtesy of Fedelity investments "The Stock Shop".

http://www.fidelity.com.au/

www.axiomax.com.au

Financial Statement Analysis of an Established Business

The stock selection process involves a large component of expectations.

The investor is usually a student of the intrinsic value and relative value, and he incorporates projections routinely into stock evaluations.

In order to form a reasonable basis for predicting corporate performance, however, the investor must understand historical financial results.

The business review enables the practitioner to attach product innovations, competitive struggles, and other qualitative items to changes in sales and earnings.

As the numerical complement to the business review, the financial analysis provides a statistical summary of the company's past by boiling it down to the common denominator of all profit-seeking enterprises - dollars and cents.

Model Research Report

1. Introduction
2. Macroeconomic Review
3. Relevant Stock Market Prospects
4. Review of the Company and Its Business
5. Financial Analysis
6. Financial Projections
7. Application of Valuation Methodologies
8. Recommendation.

Notes:

To a large extent, financial statement analysis is a lost art.  Few business schools stress the topic, and MBA students who major in finance, graduate with only a rudimentary knowledge of accounting, the nuts and bolts of financial statement analysis.

Wall Street and the institutional community deemphasize a careful study of prior financial results.  Research departments are so preoccupied with predicting future earnings that they don't take time to scrutinize past accounting data.  Furthermore extensive analysis is an expensive proposition.

With most institutions owning hundred of stocks and turning over their portfolios two to three times annually, placing a lot of effort in studying the financial statements of a single holding is not worthwhile.

Step-by-step approach to financial statement analysis

1. Begins with organizing the raw information
2. Calculating ratios and interpreting them.
3. Integrate this with the industry-specific performance ratios to make conclusions about a firm's earnings power moving forward.
4. The historical analysis sets the stage for projections, an important component of business valuation.

Insist on value when you buy (Buy when EXTREMELY undervalued and Sell when EXTREMELY overvalued; with good resons)

A stock has three prices. It has:

1. a market price, 
2. a book value and 
3. an intrinsic value.

The market price is easy to understand. It is the last traded price at the end of a trading day. 

The book value is simply the net tangible asset (NTA) as shown in its balance sheet. 

The intrinsic value is the most difficult to calculate. I do not know of any formula for this. At most, it is only an estimation. 

You have to factor in many metrics such as barrier of entry, calibre of management, earnings potentials (present and future) growth prospects, patents, etc.


So, what should we do? 

For me, I make it simply. I look at the track record relative to its earnings, earnings growth and dividend yields. The higher these are, the higher the value. 

Buying a stock at high earnings per share (PE) is risky. Unless the forward PE is  expected be much lower, avoid stocks trading with high PE. (A PE of over 16 is too high for me.) 

To value a stock, here are some metrics or key ratios to consider: 

• EPS( earnings per share); 
• D/Y (dividend yield); 
• NTA (net tangible assets); 
• PEG (price to earnings growth); 
• NPM (net profit margin); 
• ROE (return on equity); 
• D/E (debt to equity ratio) 
• C/R (current ratio); 
• PCF (price to cash flow). 

One other thing to carefully consider is the core business of the company. Here, you need to think about barrier of entry, patents and competition.






When is the best time to sell a stock

Close to 100% of all stocks will at one time or another be selling at extremely high valuation that they should be sold. 

At other times, they will be selling at overly undervalued prices that they should be bought. 

We want to sell a stock when it is very much overvalued.

Understanding the value of a stock is crucial in this respect, and with the help of technical analysis, you have the advantage of the competitive edge.





Control your emotion

Taking action for action sake is a weakness that many people fail to control. Some people need to move in and out of the market often enough to overcome boredom.

They forget that transaction costs eat into their earnings.

Buy and sell with good reasons and not simply with intuition and the need for action.

Following the guidelines mention above will go a long way to help you to invest intelligently

CFA Level I 2014 - Reading 56, Part 1: Introduction, Credit Risk & Capital Structure

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5z2TPjZN5Q&list=PLJnX_Qm2u8ejcXIF1ystPaIOibAT9E8Cg

CFA Level I 2013 - Intensive Review Seminar - Financial Reporting and Analysis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXolfaMmLwY




Lecture 22  Finacial Statement analysis
Lecture 24  Financial Reporting Standards 0.41.00
Lecture 25
Lecture 26  Understanding Balance Sheet 1.57.00
Lecture 27
Lecture 28  Financial Analysis Techniques (Ratios) 2.49.00
Lecture 29
Lecture 30  Long Lived Assets PPE & Intangibles 3.59.00
Lecture 31  Income Tax  4.46.00
Lecture 32  Non-current (Long term) Liabilities  5.53.30
Lecture 33  Red flags and accounting warning signs  6.52.00
Lecture 34  Accounting Shenanigans of the Cash Flow Statement  6.58.30
Lecture 35  Financial Statement Analysis:  Applications  7.02.00

How to Value a Stock in Order to Buy Long or Sell Short?

How to Value Stocks

The Intelligent Investor Benjamin Graham Audiobook

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOZL99qriLE

The Next Financial Crisis In 2015 China Property Bubble Tipping Point

Global Financial Crisis: Documentary on Why the World Faces Financial Meltdown

Published on Oct 5, 2014

http://www.learncurrencytradingonline... This documentary shows why we face a global financial crisis and looks at past financial meltdowns such as 2008 and before to show we face a global financial meltdown again in the future, The documentary is one of the best at looking at the causes of stock market crashes and explaining why another is probably inevitable - what are the solutions? Well there are easy solutions but Governments and central banks are ignoring them and leading the global economy into crisis - a frightening look at what could happen in the near future in the global economy. Debt is to high, banks are run in a reckless fashion all encouraged by the central banks and governments.

Goldman Sachs CNBC Documentary: Trading Techniques of an Investment Bank

The Last Days Of Lehman - Margin Call Full Movie & Film