Our Methodology for Selecting Stocks -- the Valuentum Buying Index
But how, you will ask, does one decide what [stocks are] "attractive"? Most analysts feel they must choose between two approaches customarily thought to be in opposition: "value" and "growth,"...We view that as fuzzy thinking...Growth is always a component of value [and] the very term "value investing" is redundant.
-- Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway annual report, 1993
At Valuentum, we take Buffett's thoughts one step further. We think the best opportunities arise from a complete understanding of all investing disciplines in order to identify the most attractive stocks at any given time. Valuentum therefore analyzes each stock across a wide spectrum of philosophies, from deep value through momentum investing. We think companies that are attractive from a number of investment perspectives--whether it be growth, value, income, momentum, etc.--have the greatest probability of capital appreciation and relative outperformance. The more deep-pocketed institutional investors that are interested in the stock for reasons based on their respective investment mandates, the more likely it will be bought and the more likely the price will move higher to converge to its true intrinsic value (buying a stock pushes its price higher). On the other hand, we think the worst stocks will be shunned by most investment disciplines and display expensive valuations, poor technicals and deteriorating momentum indicators.
Stocks that meet our demanding criteria fall in the center of the Venn diagram below, displaying attractive characteristics from a DCF basis, a relative value basis, and with respect to a technical and momentum assessment. The size of the circles reveal the relative emphasis we place on each investment consideration, while the arrows display the order of our process -- value first then technicals and momentum last. We may like firms that are undervalued both on a DCF basis and relative value basis, but we won't like firms just because they're currently exhibiting attractive technical or momentum indicators. We're not traders or speculators. We're long-term investors and want to have complete confirmation and conviction in the best ideas we deliver to our subscribers.
The center of the Venn diagram above, the Valuentum Buying Index (VBI) combines rigorous financial and valuation analysis with an evaluation of a firm's technicals and momentum indicators to derive a score between 1 and 10 for each company (10=best). Because our process factors in a technical and momentum assessment after we evaluate a firm's investment merits via our rigorous DCF and relative-value process, we’re better able to pinpoint the best entry and exit points on the most undervalued stocks. Research firms that just focus on valuation may encourage you to buy a stock all the way down (a falling knife), while those that just use technical and momentum indicators may expose your portfolio to significantly overpriced stocks at their peaks. Only when both sides of the investment spectrum are combined can investors get the best stocks on the market today at the best prices, in our view.
Furthermore, Valuentum subscribers are less likely to be involved in value traps because we demand material revenue and earnings growth for firms to earn a 10 on our VBI. Value traps often occur as a result of secular declines in a firm's products or services, resulting in deteriorating revenue and earnings trends. And Valuentum subscribers are less likely to be exposed to falling knives since our process requires firms to not only be undervalued but also be exhibiting bullish technicals before we would consider adding them to our actively-managed portfolios.
Let's walk through the three investment pillars of our stock-selection methodology.
I. We Use a Rigorous Discounted Cash Flow Valuation Process
Our methodology starts with in-depth financial statement analysis, where we derive our ValueCreation, ValueRisk, and ValueTrend ratings, which together provide a quantitative assessment of the strength of a firm's competitive advantages. We compare a company's return on invested capital (ROIC) to our estimate of its weighted average cost of capital (WACC) to assess whether it is creating economic profit for shareholders (ROIC less WACC equals economic profit). Firms that have improving economic profit spreads over their respective cost of capital score high on our ValueCreation and ValueTrend measures, while firms that have relatively stable returns score well with respect to our ValueRisk evaluation, which impacts our margin-of-safety assessment.
After evaluating historical trends, we then make full annual forecasts for each item on a company's income statement and balance sheet to arrive at a firm's future free cash flows. We derive a company-specific cost of equity (using a fundamental beta based on the expected uncertainty of key valuation drivers) and a cost of debt (considering the firm's capital structure and synthetic credit spread over the risk-free rate), culminating in our estimate of a company's weighted average cost of capital (WACC). We don't use a market price-derived beta, as we embrace market volatility, which provides investors with opportunities to buy attractive stocks at bargain-basement levels.
We then assess each company within our complete three-stage free cash flow to the firm (enterprise cash flow) valuation model, which generates an estimate of a company's equity value per share based on its discounted future free cash flows and the company's net balance sheet impact, including other adjustments to equity value (namely pension and OPEB adjustments). Our ValueRisk rating, which considers the underlying uncertainty of the capacity of the firm to continue to generate value for shareholders, sets the margin of safety bands around this fair value estimate. For firms that are trading below the lower bound of our margin of safety band, we consider these companies undervalued based on our DCF process. For firms that are trading above the higher bound of our margin of safety band, we consider these companies overvalued based on our DCF process.
II. We Perform a Forward-Looking Relative Value Assessment
Our discounted cash-flow process allows us to arrive at an absolute view of the firm's intrinsic value. However, we also understand the critical importance of assessing firms on a relative value basis, versus both their industry and peers. Many institutional money-managers--those that drive stock prices--pay attention to a company's price-to-earnings (PE) ratio and price-earning-to-growth (PEG) ratio in making buy/sell decisions. With this in mind, we have included a forward-looking relative value assessment in our process to further augment our rigorous discounted cash-flow process. If a company is undervalued on both a price-to-earnings ratio and a price-earnings-to-growth (PEG) ratio versus industry peers, we would consider the firm to be attractive from a relative value standpoint.
III. We Seek to Avoid Value Traps, Falling Knives and Opportunity Cost
Once we have estimated a firm's intrinsic value on the basis of our discounted cash-flow process, determined if it is undervalued according to its firm-specific margin of safety bands, and assessed whether it has relative value versus industry peers, we then evaluate the company's technical and momentum indicators to pin-point the best entry and exit points on the stock (but only after it meets our stringent valuation criteria). Rigorous valuation analysis and technical analysis are not mutually exclusive, and we believe both can be used together to bolster returns. An evaluation of a stock's moving averages, relative strength, upside-downside volume, and money flow index are but a few considerations we look at with respect to our technical and momentum assessment of a company's stock. We embrace the idea that the future is inherently unpredictable and that not all fundamental factors can be included in a valuation model. By extension, we use technical and momentum analysis to help safeguard us against value traps, falling knives, and the opportunity cost of holding an undervalued equity for years before it converges to fair value. Other research firms do not consider opportunity cost as a legitimate expense for investors.
Putting It All Together - the Valuentum Buying Index
Let's follow the red line on the flow chart below to see how a firm can score a 10, the best mark on our index (a "Top Pick"). Please click here to view an enlarged pdf version. First, the company would need to be 'UNDERVALUED' on a DCF basis and 'ATTRACTIVE' on a relative value basis. The stock would also have to be exhibiting 'BULLISH' technicals. The firm would need a ValueCreation rating of 'GOOD' or 'EXCELLENT', exhibit 'HIGH' or 'AGGRESSIVE' growth prospects, and generate at least a 'MEDIUM' or 'NEUTRAL' assessment for cash flow generation, financial leverage, and relative price strength.
This is a tall order for any company, but we're looking to deliver the very best of ideas to our clients and subscribers. Firms that don't make the cut for a 10 are ranked accordingly, with the least attractive stocks garnering a score of 1 ("We'd sell"). Most of our coverage universe falls between 3 and 7, but at any given time there could be large number of companies garnering either high or low scores, especially at market lows or tops, respectively.
Why Does Valuentum Investing Work?
Why does Valuentum Investing work? Was a young Warren Buffett a Valuentum investor? How is Valuentum Securities structured? What investment products are offered through Valuentum Securities? President of Equity Research and ETF Analysis, Brian Nelson answers these questions and more in the following presentation slide deck.
Please click on the image below to download it.