Stingy Investor The Rothery Report
  Home | Articles | Screens | Tools | Links | SNW | Rothery Report
 
MoneySaver Articles
 2 Graham Stocks for 2017
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2016
 5 Graham Stocks for 2016
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2015
 3 Graham Stocks for 2015
 3 Stingy Stocks for 2014
 4 Graham Stocks for 2014
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2013
 6 Graham Stocks for 2013
 9 Stingy Stocks for 2012
 8 Graham Stocks for 2012
 Simple Way 2011
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2011
 7 Graham Stocks for 2011
 Simple Way 2010
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2010
 8 Graham Stocks for 2010
 Simple Way 2009
 Timing Temptation
 19 Stingy Stocks for 2009
 4 Graham Stocks for 2009
 Simple Way 2008
 Active at Passive Prices
 Unbundling ETFs 2008
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2008
 5 Graham Stocks for 2008
 Is your index too active?
 Graham's Simple Way
 Canadian Graham Stocks
 5 Stingy Stocks for 2007
 8 Graham Stocks for 2007
 Top SPPs
 The Simple Way
 A hole in your IPO?
 Monkey Business
 8 Stingy Stocks for 2006
 Graham Stock Gainers
 Blue-Chip Blues
 Are Dividends Safe?
 SPPs for 2005
 Graham's Simplest Way
 Selling Graham Stocks
 RRSP Money Market Funds
 Stingy Stocks for 2005
 High Performance Graham
 Intelligent Indexing
 Unbundling Canadian ETFs
 A history of yield
 A Dynamic Duo
 Canadian Graham Stock
 Dividends at Risk
 Thrifty Value Stocks
 Stocks in Short Supply
 The New Dividend
 Hunting Goodwill
 SPPs for 2003
 RRSP: don't panic
 Desirable Dividends
 Stingy Selections 2003
 10 Graham Picks
 Growth Eh?
 Timing Disaster
 Dangerous Diversification
 The Coffee Can Portfolio
 Down with the dogs
 Stingy Selections
 Frugal Funds
 Graham Revisited
 Just Spend It
 Ticker Temptation
 Stock Mortality
 Focus on Fees
 SPPs for the Long Term
 Seeking Solid Stocks
 Relative Strength
 The VR Approach
 The Irrational Investor
 Value Investing
 Eye on PI

MoneySense Articles
 Cdn Top 200 2016
 US Top 500 2016
 Retirement 100: 2015
 Cdn Top 200 2015
 US Top 500 2015
 Retirement 100: 2014
 Cdn Top 200 2014
 US Top 500 2014
 Retirement 100: 2013
 Cdn Top 200 2013
 US Top 500 2013
 Retirement 100: 2012
 Buffett Buys
 FB IPO
 Stocks that pay
 Value in the S&P500
 Cdn Top 200 2012
 US Top 500 2012
 Retirement 100: 2011
 Where to invest $100k
 Where to invest $10k
 Summer Simple Way
 A crystal ball for stocks?
 Cheap & safe
 Risky business
 Cdn Top 200 2011
 US Top 500 2011
 Retirement 100
 Dividend investing
 Value investing
 Momentum investing
 Low P/E P/B
 Dividends
 Dividend growers
 Cdn Top 200 2010
 US Top 500 2010
 Graham's prescription
 Income 100: 2009
 The case for optimism
 Cdn Top 200 2009
 U.S. Top 500 2009
 Wicked investments
 Simply spectacular
 Income 2008
 Small stocks, big profits
 Cdn Top 200 2008
 US Top 500 2008
 Value that sizzles
 So simple it works
 Income 100
 No assembly required
 Investing by the book
 Cdn Top 200 2007
 US Top 500 2007
 Invest like the masters
 A simple way to get rich
 Top Trusts 2006
 Stocks for cannibals
 Car bites dogs
 Cdn Top 200 2006
 US Top 1000 2006
 So easy, so profitable
 Top Trusts 2005
 Dogs of the Dow
 Top 200 2005
 Money for nothing
 Yield of dreams
 Return of the master

Globe & Mail Articles
 Indexing advice
 Media-shy stocks
 Curse of size
 Market uncertainty
 Be even lazier
 Scary beats safe
 Small, illiquid, value
 Use the numbers
 What value is good value?
 Sculpt for value
 Value vs CAPE
 Graham Rules
 CAPE vs PeakE
 Top value ratio
 Low Beta
 Value and dividends
 Walter Schloss
 Try unloved AIG
 Why I'm a value investor
 New world of ETFs
 Low P/Es possible
 10 yielders
 Be happier
 Long-Short
 Dividend Downside
 Shiller's P/E
 Copycat investing
 Cashing in on class
 Index roulette
 Theory collides
 Diving too deep
 3 retirement villains
 Scourge of inflation
 Economic omens
 Analyst Expectations
 Value stock scarcity
 It's all in the index
 How to pick good funds
 Low Beta Wins
 Hunt for dividend stocks
 Think garage sale

Advisor's Edge Articles
 Passive Rebundling
 Doing the math

Norm Speaks
Flip Books



4 Stingy Stocks for 2005

I look for two qualities when searching for bargain stocks; they must be cheap and they must be safe. Not surprisingly, it is often difficult to find stocks that are both cheap and safe. Indeed, the popularity of value investing has increased and good deals are becoming rare.

When it comes to cheap, I usually look for stocks with low prices in relation to book value, earnings, sales or cash flow. I find that it is usually best to initially search for cheap stocks using only one or two of these fundamental values because each search reveals a slightly different list of stocks. When developing my annual list for the Canadian MoneySaver I stick to stocks with price to sales ratios of less than one.

Stocks with low ratios can be tricky which is why I also want a degree of safety. Because large firms tend to be more stable than smaller firms, I limit my search to stocks in the S&P500.

More importantly, companies with little debt and lots of assets are in a much stronger position than firms with large debts. Three ratios are very useful when searching for companies with little debt. The debt-to-equity ratio is calculated by dividing a company’s long-term debt by shareholder equity. The amount of debt that a company can comfortably support varies from industry to industry but debt-to-equity ratios of more than one are generally too high. I prefer to consider companies with even less debt and look for a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.5 or less. Next up is the current ratio which is calculated by dividing a company’s current assets by its current liabilities. Current assets are defined as assets, such as receivables and inventory, that can be turned into cash within the next year. Current liabilities are payments that the company must make within the next year. Naturally, an investor would like a company’s current assets to be much more than its current liabilities and I prefer companies with current assets at least twice as large as current liabilities. Finally, a company’s earnings before interest and taxes should be large in comparison to its interest payments. The ratio of earnings before interest and taxes to interest payments is called interest coverage and I like this ratio to be two or higher.

While the debt ratios that I've selected are very useful when determining a firm's ability to shoulder debt, they are not perfect. Some long-term obligations may not be fully reflected on a company's balance sheet and are, sensibly enough, called off-balance sheet debt. Regrettably, off-balance sheet debt is often ignored but it can be a source of considerable consternation. Consider the case of Enron which floundered under a mountain of hard-to-find off-balance-sheet debt. As with all screening techniques, a more detailed investigation of each stock is warranted before a final investment decision is made.

Continuing to look for safety, I demand that a company has seen some earnings and cash flow from operations over the last year. After all, it is less likely that a business will go under when it is profitable and has cash coming in the door.

I've summarized all of my criteria in Table 1 and I've used the same criteria over the last three years to find interesting value stocks.

Table 1: Stingy Criteria
1. A member of the S&P500
2. Debt-to-Equity Ratio less than or equal to 0.5
3. Current Ratio of more than 2
4. Interest Coverage of more than 2
5. Some Cash Flow from Operations
6. Some Earnings
7. Price to Sales ratio of less than 1


In 2002 the stocks selected based on my screen managed to outperform the S&P500 by 20.2 percentage points even though they lost 1.9% in absolute terms. In comparison the S&P500 was walloped by a 22.1% decline. The situation improved in 2003 with my value stocks gaining an average of 38.8% or 15.8 percentage points better than the S&P500 which gained 23.0%.

The good times continued in 2004 with value stocks gaining 29.8% from December 3, 2003 to December 1, 2004. The S&P500, as represented by the SPY exchange-traded fund, gained 13.4% which is 16.4 percentage points less than 2004's value picks.

So far, my strategy has gained 76.7% since 2002 whereas the S&P500 has gained only 8.7%. I'm pleased to report that my selections have had a very good run and they've outperformed the index by 68.0 percentage points. I should also hasten to add that I don't expect this method to routinely outperform the index. I fully expect that it will encounter a down year, from time to time. Recent history is instructive because the late 1990s saw value stocks languish for many consecutive years.

To find this year's crop of value stocks, I used the MSN.com deluxe stock screener on December 1, 2004 which yielded the four securities shown in Table 2. The majority of the stocks found this year were also on last year's list with Louisiana-Pacific (LPX) being the only new addition. I've also included each stock's dividend yield which should be of interest to investors looking for income.

Table 2: Stingy Selections for 2005
Company Name Share Price Price / Sales Debt to Equity Current Ratio Interest Coverage Price / Cash Flow P/E Dividend Yield
Louisiana-Pacific (LPX) $26.97 0.90 0.36 3.7 14.3 3.8 4.7 1.6%
Reebok International (RBK) $39.05 0.62 0.31 2.4 12.4 10.7 14.0 0.8%
Snap-on Incorporated (SNA) $31.96 0.76 0.30 2.1 5.7 13.0 24.5 3.2%
Nucor Corporation (NUE) $52.29 0.85 0.30 2.3 50.0 7.1 10.5 1.0%
Source: www.msn.com, December 1 2004


Remember that it is worth taking time to fully investigate each stock, and to talk to your investment advisor, before investing. After all, there is no such thing as a risk-free stock.

It is interesting to note that the number of stocks found by my screen has been falling over the years with twelve in 2001, ten in 2002, eight in 2003 and only four this year. To my mind this trend is worrisome and a sign that the U.S. large-cap market is becoming less and less of a bargain.

Date: Jan 2005

Additional Resources:


 
Discover top U.S. and Canadian value stocks in
The Rothery Report
About Legal Contact Us
Disclaimers: Consult with a qualified investment adviser before trading. Past performance is a poor indicator of future performance. The information on this site, and in its related newsletters, is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, investment advice or recommendations. The information on this site is in no way guaranteed for completeness, accuracy or in any other way. More...