Friday, February 18, 2011

How to Analyze Dividend Stocks Using Levered Free Cash Flow - Seeking Alpha

How to Analyze Dividend Stocks Using Levered Free Cash Flow - Seeking Alpha


Disclaimer: Always remember that these are the results of ourresearch based on the methodology that I have outlined above and inother articles previously published. This research is provided as aneducational tool and should not be considered investment advice, butjust the results of our research. There are many ways to analyze astock and you should never blindly follow anyones work without doingyour own due diligence or by seeking the help of an investment advisor,if you so need one. As Registered Investment Advisors, we see it as ourresponsibility to advise the following: We take our research seriously, wedo our best to get it right, and weeat our own cooking,” but we couldbe wrong. Please note, investments involve risk and unless otherwisestated, are not guaranteed. Past performance cannot be used as anindicator to determine future results. Strategies mentioned may not besuitable for everyone. We do not know your personal financial situation,so the information contained in this communiqué represents the opinionsof PeterMycroftPsaras, and should not be construed as personalizedinvestment advice. Information expressed does not take into accountyour specific situation or objectives, and is not intended asrecommendations appropriate for you. Before acting on any informationmentioned, it is recommended to seek advice from a qualified tax orinvestment adviser to determine whether it is suitable for your specificsituation.

Disclosure: I am long NOK, CTL.

Looking for more investing ideas, news, opinion & analysis on this topic?
Read more in Investing for Income »
Add Your Comment
Track new comments on this article
13 Comments
Add a comment
  • Peter
    Ive looked at your backtest of djia. It confirms what has been known....if you buy companies that are undervalued, you will get higher return. If you change the criteria to buying the stocks with the lowest pe or the highest dividend yield or lowest sales to price (one of Ken Fishes favorite in his book Superstocks), you will get similiar results. James o shaunessy demonstrated this in his book also
    Feb 17 09:09 AMReply! Report abuse+10
  • Hi PoortoRich,

    Everything you say is true, but investors continue to pile into stocks with extreme valuations. My whole goal in writing these articles is to teach the individual investor to do the same thing in the stock market that they do when they go shopping at the super market and that is to know the prices that they are willing to pay before they invest and to avoid overpaying. In just a minute they can find out if they are paying a fair price or not, using Warren Buffett's ratio. Warren Buffett knows what he is willing to pay at all times, so why shouldn't the individual investor.

    Thank's for posting,

    Mycroft
    Feb 17 09:24 AMReply! Report abuse+40
  • I use leveraged free cash flow as the most important data point in determining whether a company has the capacity to grow its dividend over time. I look at dividends paid as a % of leveraged FCF. If dividends are less than 60% of FCF, that is reasonable (CVX, KMB, CLX, KO, LEG, PG, BCE) Less than 50% is attractive (ADP, WM, HD, PM)....and the elite (at least in terms of potential to grow) dividend growth stocks are less than 40% (ABT, JNJ, WMT, LLY, VZ, INTC).

    Of course having the capacity to grow dividends does not mean a company will grow its dividend(see LLY), but the capacity to pay dividends does build a margin of safety around the dividend which is critical to dividend growth investors like myself. I also look at debt/EBITDA as a factor in evaluating dividend capacity. Certain companies have a very high (90%+) dividend payout as % of levered FCF, but also have a stated policy of doing so (MO, CTL).

    Long CVX, KMB, PG, ADP, PM, ABT, JNJ, WMT, LLY, VZ, MO and INTC.
    Feb 17 12:58 PMReply! Report abuse+70
  • You must know by now that your CTL figures are completely incorrect and historical. It would be remiss is you didn't state that CTL is acquiring Qwest. Qwest has $20B in debt and a negative networth and just reported losses on sales of $10B+/-. The leverage ratio (debt-to-networth) will jump to 300%+. Moreover, the dividend coverage ratio in this instance has to be looked at if debt repayments are taken into account for Qwest. So, your CTL numbers are irrelvant and demonstrate the backward looking analysis that you are proposing. In isolation, your type of envelope analysis is likely more dangerous than it would seem on the surface. You did quaflify by stating they are examples, but in addition to performing any type of analysis, you might also consider the news flow, analyst ratings, consensus forecasts, put/call ratios, short interest, etc. Well, at least that is whyat I do, but I am trader and prefer not to hold anything.
    Feb 17 02:57 PMReply! Report abuse+1-2
  • Actually my numbers on CTL are ultra conservative. If you do a levered free cash flow using Value line they get $1.621 billion for 2010 and $1.566 billion for 2011. Many underestimate the power of land lines in the age wireless, but I will always have a land line as my business can not go down and if the power in my house goes down my DSL internet will still run. I have a back up gas generator connected to my house so no matter what happens I am always up and running and connected. George Soros also has a ton of money invested in CTL as the dividend is very solid.

    Thank you for your comments,

    Mycroft
    Feb 17 04:44 PMReply! Report abuse+20
  • Whether you have done your own analysis and I care less whether George Zoros has an interest in it or not, I am pointing out that the free cash flow is about to change considerbly with the addition of Qwest and you cannot look at free cash flow without considering financing activities as part of that analysis. In other words, the financing activites below operating cash flow matter.

    In this instance, Qwest repaid $2B in debt payments through the period ending 9/30/10. My point is that free cash flow has to be adjusted from time-to-time, and my argument is that in this instance, the debt level and leverage of Qwest plus network spend and network integration costs will put considerble pressure on the divdiend.

    Management sold the sharedholders on the flawed concept that leverage would be improved (debt to EBITDA) and said the divdiend coverage ratio woudl improve (which it will not when you consider debt and network spending requirements). So, if you want to think the dividend is solid, please due.

    My argument here is that this stock is about to take a dive. If you have been noting it reached a high of 46+ and is now down to $42.17 and falling. We will see $40 soon enough. I am short the stock through puts. Now, you can hold on to June to see if you get your dividend, which I think you will, but our capital loss will more than eat up $.725 per quarter. It already has.

    Because I was in the telecommunications business, focused on voice and least cost routing, and I was a finance director, I have full appreciation for power of land lines, but what people forget that the payback period for net work investments is considerbly more than the nickels you spend on your DSL service, which is not near as good as fibre service via your cable provider.

    Now, you like Zoros do you. Well, I can't compete with him and I don't have a massive portfolio. It does show that it matters to you; it does not to me. He might now even now he has the investment. Who I do appreciate is Warren Buffet. What he suggests is that you avoid, albeit he changes his mind when he becomes a lender, heavy fixed cost models. This is one of those models, and the only shareholder benefiting here will be Qwest. Given the fact that the four telecommuniactions I worked went under and Qwest is the relic from the dot.com bust, then you would appreciate it when I say that the fixed costs and heavy debt load is going to create a sell off which is well underway.
    Feb 18 04:56 AMReply! Report abuse+1-2
  • I did your back of the envelope analysis on WIN . It looked pretty good. They pay out $1/share and their owners earnings per share is $1.38 . They have a pretty high debt level so that raises a small flag, to your point that you want to be careful that a company is not just borrowing to pay the dividend. I think your blueprint is a great starting point in the analysis investors must use when looking at dividend paying companies. One of the items I always view when looking at dividend paying stocks, or closed end funds is the dividend paying history. This will show how consistent the payments have been, have they raised dividends etc. Nothing is bullet proof of course. A great example is Pfizer who had not lowered their dividend (only raised it) for decades..... until a couple years a go when they dropped it in half (Feb 2009).
    Feb 17 03:17 PMReply! Report abuse+10
  • Thank you for your instructive comments. Pfizer made a major mistake by dropping their dividend when they did and lost a lot of long term investors in the process, but where there is pain, there is also gain for others who capitalized on that gaff to get shares of an amazing company at 40 year lows.

    Mycroft
    Feb 17 04:55 PMReply! Report abuse+20
  • Another good source for data is divdiendinvestor.com. While not great for the type of analysis you are doing, it is good about dividend history. Ironically, I was earlier posting about post. If you look at the metric, which is the length of time a company has increased its divdiend and the consistency of the dividend, CTL gets a five start rating. WIN gets no starts, but as the write suggested it's debt load is also heavy. We will find out about WIN today when we see the numbers, but it too has a very heavy debt load. When compared with CTL, I prefer WIN because we now know there debt levels as compared to CTL's whose levels are about to rise. I really am enouraging you to be more comprehensive in teaching others to study balance sheet, income statement, cash flow, analysts ratings, etc. before investing. The nature of the sector and the performance of that sector and whether a sector requires heavy capex is critical. Mostly, you have to know what is going on.
    Feb 18 05:02 AMReply! Report abuse+20
  • I am in total agreement regarding CTL and I am grateful to you (gbsjamin) for taking the time to highlight the Q debt level concerns
    that plague this acquisition and will create considerable headwinds for CTL which is still adjusting for the Embarq acquisition.
    Feb 18 10:52 AMReply! Report abuse00
  • I used to use dividendinvestor.com but I have to really question how they come up with their numbers. I disagree that they have good information...

    For example: they show JNJ as having 19 years of consecutive dividend increases when its been well over 40.
    They show the P/E as 12 and don't go out to any decimals.Sometimes it may not matter but sometimes there is a difference between 12.01 and their current 12.76
    Their EPS is shown as $1.24 which I presume is a quarter but when is it updated? Its been nearly a month since last quarter they announced an EPS of $1.03

    I follow JNJ close so I knew the numbers where off but what if I was looking at a company for the first time?
    Feb 18 11:53 AMReply! Report abuse+20
  • I agree, I am not impressed by dividendinvestor.com's information. :-(

No comments:

Post a Comment