Price-to-Fair Value
HelpRegister |
Price-to-Fair Value A few of you wrote to request an explanation of how the price-to-fair value ratio (P/FV) was used in the screening results from the St. Louis convention. First and foremost, it was something of a tribute to the participation of Morningstar and Standard & Poor's at the conference. Sam Stovall is a kahuna at S&P and provided a couple of solid speeches and spent a fair amount of time with the attendees. Second, it's an approach based on discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis ... and NO, I don't believe it's better or frankly, that it's something that you need to know. (It should be presented in that context at club meetings or conferences.) In a nutshell, DCF goes through most of the same motions and considerations that we do (with a few more elusive variables sprinkled in) and builds a "model" of a company in much the same manner as we do during our stock studies. The difference is they (Morningstar, S&P, Buffett and most b-school graduates) do it backwards and upside down when compared to our simplified calculation of a projected annual return. We study the company and based on a future price projection -- make an estimate of returns. They study the company and convert a series of cash flows to a current value known as fair value. One way to translate their results into our vernacular would be to think of the current price that would deliver approximately a 10% return ... in essence, a fair historical return. The P/FV is a comparison between the current price and this calculated result. If the current stock price is $20 and the fair value is $25 ... the P/FV would be 20/25 = 0.80 or 80% ... and would suggest that the stock is at a 20% discount to fair value. For the screening results shared in Stars under the Arch, we simply sought a collection of study candidates with favorable (lower) P/FV ratios. Feel free to study DCF methods and understand the basics, but I repeat -- there's no need to switch "churches" and Nicholson would suggest that the SSG approach is probably superior and more easily comprehended. Best wishes and Better Investing, Mark Robertson |
|