How to invest

Every investment has the potential to be both a great opportunity or a mistake.

How?

It all comes down to the price. Regardless of how bad or good you believe the company to be, the price will justify whether it is a good investment or a bad one.

There are too many instances where I dismiss opportunities because the state of the company is horrible. But do you ask yourself whether the current price justifies the situation of the company?

Risk by definition is the potential for permanent loss of capital. Therefore the price you pay will make up a great amount of that risk.

This brings me to previously held stocks.

For some strange reason, once I’ve bought and sold a stock, I find it difficult to buy back in. It’s like I dust my hands and take the stock off my mental list.

But I do maintain a list of stocks I previously owned that I wouldn’t mind owning again. Since I already know about the company, catching up on research is very easy, and the point is that old ideas can very easily become new ones.

So here’s my list of previous positions that I keep track of that may interest you.

Previous Stocks I Had Owned

Apple (AAPL) – Tech company.

Not much chance to buy at current prices. Although AAPL continues to redefine and lead the consumer tech age, I don’t follow the GARP (Growth at a Reasonable Price) strategy.

American Eagle (AEO) – Teenage retail.

Retail remains tough and the company still has a long way to go. From personal observations, it looks like their willingness to follow the fashion trend is on the slow side. Their 20-30’s concept brand Martin+Osa failed.

Atwood Oceanics (ATW) – Oil driller.

Not ATW directed, but I made a dumb mistake by not buying RIG (as well as BP). Other ideas worth watching in the oil drilling industry is ESV and HAWK.

Electronic Systems (ELST) – Wireless Products.

I bought ELST then realized I paid a little too  much. My initial calculations were incorrect, but drops to $0.35 is a buy for me. The low volume just makes it so difficult to get in and out.

Ambassadors Group (EPAX) – Educational travel programs.

My first spin-off purchase before I even knew what a spin-off was. The small niche it operates in makes it difficult to expand and garner growth. Trading around intrinsic value.

Entercom (ETM) - Radio

I have to admit a mistake here. I got scared out of buying again by the big drops. Recently dropped back to attractive levels but wasn’t able to pull the trigger. I have a lot to learn myself. Still able to generate plenty of FCF. Debt is always an issue but ETM has been one of the better ones in handling their debt load. The CEO of EMMS, the recent failed going private play, cites that the radio business is improving and he is seeing increased business in the industry.

Something to continue to keep an eye on and hope for another entry point.

EnviroStar (EVI) – Commercial drycleaning equipment.

For a company of its size, EVI is very profitable but the problem is that I see no catalyst. I don’t believe the CEO to be shareholder friendly and EVI isn’t in an industry with the opportunity to be bought out.

Will be taking EVI off the watchlist.

K-Swiss (KSWS) – Athletic Shoes.

KSWS hasn’t been able to recover as much from their lows. Concepts in Free Running didn’t pick things up as expected and they base sales off a few key customers who have reduced orders, making it tough for the company to pick up sales. Financial health is excellent though and management is shareholder friendly but don’t expect the stock to do much for an extra year or so.

NutriSystem (NTRI) – Diet food.

Company has been able to expand their distribution channel resulting in increased revenue but the current price does not offer an adequate margin of safety. I would like to see NTRI below $15 before revisting the company.

Radio One (ROIAK) – Radio

Price is below $1 again from $5. This one hurt bad. Held on far too long and a big reason for the under performance this year. It is tempting to see it at such a cheap price again, but the looming debt makes it risky. Unless it drops to the 50c range, risk is far too high despite the reward. Focusing on risk here rather than reward.

Servotronics (SVT) – Makes control components for machinery and cutlery.

Machinery equipment and cutlery don’t mix but SVT has been doing a good job of providing both. Strong balance sheet and a majority of sales coming from government contracts. No analyst coverage and tiny volume make it difficult to buy. However, price drops of 15% over a 1000 shares make the entry point possible at a cheap price. Looking for an entry point of around mid to low $8’s.

ValueVision (VVTV) – Home shopping.

I would say it was VVTV that made Old School Value famous

The sad thing is that the company hasn’t met my expectations of a turnaround. Their latest quarter was an improvement over the last comparable period, but the company is comparing itself to its worst year.

VVTV is now $2 but with the way it is currently running, I would say that’s about right. $1 is when I would buy again.

Disclosure

None

With the Dow hovering around 10,000 again, you  may be interested in what I have on my watch list.

Medtronic (MDT)

A leader in the industry of medical equipment yet is trading at 1998 prices. Became interested after reading Vitaly Katsenelson’s latest article rebutting Barron’s. I was very close to buying a position this morning but had to wait to go through some finer details.

Typical of medical instrument companies, MDT has huge margins. Gross margin is over 80%, operating margin is still maintained at 30% and the net margin is just under 20% with the average net margin over 10 years being 19%.

Barron’s sees MDT’s debt as a problem, and to be honest, it has been rising. The TTM debt to equity is at 96% which means for every $1 of equity there is $1 of debt. However, FCF to total debt is about 26% TTM, FCF to short term debt is 135% and FCF to long term debt is 50%. In other words, MDT generates plenty of FCF to cover all of its debt without having to take any loans.

MDT is trading at a multiple of 10 but should really be trading at about 13-14 compared to its peers. This puts the estimated value in the range of $40-44. DCF also comes out to around $45-50.  Historical consistency makes it easier to value and the Benjamin Graham formula gives a value of around $45 as well.

John B Sanfilippo & Son (JBSS)

A company that came up in one of my value screens. JBSS is a commodity business selling nuts and a net margin of 1.2% last year reflects the competitiveness of the industry. What makes JBSS worth keeping on the watchlist is that the company has been focusing on reducing debt and driving profitability to the bottom line.

There was a period from 2006 to 2009 where short term debt had doubled but the company has been aggressively paying back both short term and long term debt to reduce interest expense and strengthening its balance sheet. This has helped the company go from negative owner earnings to positive territory again.

You can see the improvement in operations by following each criteria of the Piotroski score. The current TTM Piotroski F score stands at 8.

Valuation wise, JBSS isn’t exactly in value territory. With a 0% growth rate and 12% discount rate, the DCF based on an owner earnings of $16.7m  comes out to be $12.

Food Technology Service (VIFL)

Value Uncovered beat me in writing about VIFL and since VIFL is still a stock on my watchlist, I will direct you to the VIFL analysis.

Duckwall Alco Stores (DUCK)

Duckwall Alco is a small company operating small retail stores in towns. The company has very low volume and fits the NCAV category of investments. I.e. its current assets are greater than its total liabilities. DUCK, being a store operator, expect a lot of its assets to be in inventory. The NCAV comes out to be around $18 and the current price of just under $14 offers about a 25% margin of safety.

Although DUCK is a net net, it doesn’t have a consistent history of losses. Capex was higher than normal during 2009, but it was due to a growth strategy of new store openings. I still don’t expect much in the way of growth and it is likely that DUCK will  stay in the NCAV category without much recognition or exposure. As much as I would like to apply a DCF valuation, the FCF numbers are inconsistent so it would be best to rely on valuation based on assets.

Sales is consistent which shows that if management can get costs down and operate the company smoothly, DUCK has a chance of breaking out of the NCAV region. The only problem is that most companies can’t do this.

Disclosure

No positions. Not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks mentioned.

This is a continuation of the first post on the performances of the value stock screens.

Value Stock Screen Performances 2010 YTD

CROIC Screen

I created this screen to identify potential turnarounds or companies that have already changed the direction of  the company.

A company that is able create positive returns from invested capital is a good find. But a company able to create positive, increasing cash returns from invested capital is a great find.

CROIC stands for Cash Return on Invested Capital and for those new to the concept, F Wall Street has great explanations and examples of this metric.

In short, below is the formula for CROIC.

CROIC = FCF/Invested Capital

Invested Capital = Total Equity + Total Liabilities – Current Liabilities  – Excess Cash

Excess Cash = Total Cash – MAX(0,Current Liabilities-Current Assets)

With a return of +5% YTD, this screen is meeting my expectations of screening for great opportunities.

Best 5 Performers

• MIND C.T.I. (MNDO) : +104%
• MTR Gaming Group (MNTG) : 72%
• X-Rite (XRIT) : 68%
• Key Tronic Corporation (KTCC) : 35%
• EasyLink Services International (ESIC) : 32%

Worst 5 Performers

• Kindred Healthcare (KND) : -29%
• NovaMed (NOVA) : -29%
• Apogee Enterprises (APOG) : -25%
• Spartan Motors (SPAR) : -21%
• Cross Country Healthcare (CCRN) : -16%

Altman Z Screen

The Altman Z score is to predict companies that are likely to go bankrupt within the next year or so, selecting a group of companies where the Altman Z score is above 3 should gather a list of fundamentally strong companies.

Z = 1.2*X1 + 1.4*X2 + 3.3*X3 + 0.6*X4 + 1.0*X5

When Z is 3.0 or more, the firm is most likely safe based on the financial data. However, be careful to double check as fraud, economic downturns and other factors could cause unexpected reversals.

When Z is 2.7 to 3.0, the company is probably safe from bankruptcy, but this is in the grey area and caution should be taken.

When Z is 1.8 to 2.7, the company is likely to be bankrupt within 2 years. This is the lower portion of the grey area and a dramatic turnaround of the company is needed.

When Z is below 1.8, the company is highly likely to be bankrupt. If a company is generating lower than 1.8, serious studies must be performed to ensure the company can survive.

Best 5 Performers

• Dialysis Corporation of Ameri* (DCAI) : 57%
• UFP Technologies, Inc. (UFPT) : 53%
• Dorman Products Inc. (DORM) : 51%
• TESSCO Technologies, Inc. (TESS) : 33%
• Dollar Tree, Inc. (DLTR) : 30%

Worst 5 Performers

• Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (COCO) : -42%
• Lincoln Educational Services  (LINC) : -30%
• Big 5 Sporting Goods Corporat (BGFV) : -26%
• Walgreen Company (WAG) : -24%
• Tech Data Corporation (TECD) : -13%

Free Cash Flow Cow

Given that the purpose of this FCF screen is to identify cash cows, I believe it is doing a fine job despite under performing by couple percentage points. I would have expected the overall performance to be better since the listed companies have proven free cash flow with cheap valuations.

One anti thesis that I thought of was that companies, no matter how big or small, that starts to accumulate FCF is a sign that the company is not investing in growth which the market does not care for.

Best 5 Performers

• Triumph Group (TGI) : 50%
• Key Tronic Corporation (KTCC) : 35%
• CIRCOR International (CIR) : 28%
• SFN Group (SFN) : 27.%
• Ceradyne (CRDN) : 26%

Worst 5 Performers

• Willbros Group (WG) : -50%
• Sterling Construction Company (STRL) : -37%
• Apogee Enterprises (APOG) : -25%
• La-Z-Boy (LZB) : -16%
• Century Casinos (CNTY) : -15%

Graham’s Net Net Working Capital Screen

One thing that I’ve realized for sure is that investing is a game of adjustments. You think you have a strategy that will consistently beat the market, but situations change and the strategy is no longer as effective.

Investing is all about the company valuation, whether your purchase price will reward you for the risk you are taking, which is dictated by the market valuation.

In 2009, when the broad markets were statistically cheap, these Net Net stocks were high flyers. In a fairly to overvalued market, the same set of companies can be a killer.

However, the -17% performance is an exaggeration because many of these stocks are less than $1 and with the proper allocation, I’m sure the result could have ended up positive.

• Forward Industries, Inc. (FORD) : 66%
• Leadis Technology, Inc. (LDIS) : 40%
• Heelys, Inc. (HLYS) : 25%
• Sycamore Networks, Inc. (SCMR) : 11%
• New Dragon Asia Corp. (NWD) : -37%
• Tegal Corporation (TGAL) : -50%
• China 3C Group (CHCG) : -50%
• China Crescent Enterprises, I (CCTR) : -64%
• NewMarket Technology, Inc. (NWMT) : -96%

Graham’s Net Current Asset Value Screen

NCAV companies do not get any prettier. With only 6 stocks that made the list at the beginning of the year, things were bound to be tough for Graham this year.

• Parlux Fragrances (PARL) : 6.8%
• Qiao Xing Universal Resources (XING) : -25%
• Qiao Xing Mobile Communicatio (QXM) : -29%
• InfoSonics Corporation (IFON) : -41%
• Tegal Corporation (TGAL) : -50%
• Orsus Xelent Technologies (ORS) : -61%

Disclosure

None

I keep track of 10 value stock screens on this site and so far the 2010 YTD performance has been impressive.

These value screens are built more from logic and common sense rather than the standard low PE PB ratios and high ROE’s.

Value Stock Screen Performances 2010 YTD

The S&P 500 and Russell 2000 index returns are the price returns you would expect after fees, not the net performance.

Insider Buys Value Screen

As the name suggests, a screener that tracks insider buying activity. Based on the simple idea that the insiders supposedly know best about their own company.

This screen looks for insider transactions where there are at least 10 purchases and less than 1 sales transaction. In other words, a stock where insiders have heavy conviction that their stock is cheap.

More insider buys backtesting and results can be found. I also believe the reason why this screen is working out so well is because of the momentum and buzz around heavy insider buying news.

Best 5 Performers

• KEMET Corp [[KEM]] : +220.8%
• Rotech Healthcare [[ROHI]] : +210.8%
• Charles & Colvard [[CTHR]] : +99.1%
• DDi Corp [[DDIC]] : +94.12%
• One Liberty Properties [[OLP]] : 72.68%

Worst 5 Performers

• ValueVision Media [[VVTV]] : -64.33%
• TranS1 Inc [[TSON]] : -40%
• Reddy Ice Holdings [[FRZ]] : -31%
• SuperGen [[SUPG]] : -27.38%
• AdCard Health Systems [[ADK]] : -10.5%

Share Buyback Value Screen

Share buybacks have the advantage of reducing the number of shares outstanding, which will increase EPS. Companies can then report higher EPS in later periods even though nothing has changed. Since Wall Street glorifies EPS, this should serve to increase the stock price.

Share repurchase plans also gives the view to the general public that management considers their company stock to be cheap enough to buy. This isn’t always the case, but the perception is true.

Another view is that the company is buying back shares because they have ample cash lying around. Repurchase programs are also announced publicly which provides greater exposure.

Best 5 Performers

• Bodisen Biotech [[BBCZ]] : +139.2%
• Escalade [[ESCA]] : +122%
• Banks.com [[BNX]] : +66.7%
• BreitBurn Energy Partners [[BBEP]] : 55.19%
• USEC Inc [[USU]] : 43.6%

Worst 5 Performers

• K-V Pharmaceutical Company [[KV.A]] : -68.1%
• Radio One [[ROIAK]] : -64.73%
• VaxGen [[VXGN]] : -40%
• SkyWest [[SKYW]] : -29%
• Hornbeck Offshore Services [[HOS]] : -27.26%

NNWC Increasing

Warren Buffett has said that the best way to value Berkshire Hathaway is to calculate the book value of the company. I’ve taken it one step further by applying the same logic to the Graham principle of Net Net Working Capital.

A company that is able to increase cash, accounts receivables and/or inventory at a much higher rate than debt over consecutive years is a sign of well run operations leading to gains in stock price.

So far, the theory seems to be holding true as the screen is up 7% YTD.

Best 5 Performers

• Lattice Semiconductors [[LSCC]] : +92.3%
• AXT Inc [[AXTI]] : +73.8%
• Integrated Silicon Solution [[ISSI]] : +44.5%
• EF Johnson Technologies [[EFJI]] : +33%
• Atmel Corporation [[ATML]] : +28.8%
• JAKKS Pacific [[JAKK]] : +27.52%

Worst 5 Performers

• Alvarion [[ALVR]] : -46.5%
• Hooper Holmes [[HH]] : -45.6%
• The Spectranetics Corporation [[SPNC]] : -25.7%
• Zoran [[ZRAN]] : -23%
• Affymetrix [[AFFX]] : -16.44%

Negative Enterprise Value Screen

Since enterprise value accounts for debt and subtracts the excess cash from the equation, if EV results in a negative number, the conclusion is that the company is loaded with excess cash, hence a cash rich company trading for less than it’s value.

If you look at NCAV stocks in the Graham cheap stock screen, you will see that many companies are loaded with inventory or receivables, but a company with negative EV will have a higher percentage of assets in cash. That is, higher quality of assets.

Best 5 Performers

• MIND C.T.I. [[MNDO]] : +105.3%
• TTI Team Telecom International [[TTIL]] : 90.8%
• PDI Inc [[PDII]] : +73.75%
• Forward Industries [[FORD]] : +66%
• Bonso Electronics [[BNSO]] : +57.14%

Worst 5 Performers

• Soapstone Networks [[SOAP]] : -97%
• United American Healthcare [[UAHC]] : -50%
• EDCI Holdings [[EDCI]] : -43.8%
• Jacada [[JCDA]] : -33.3%
• Thomas Group [[TGIS]] : -32.2%

Piotroski F Score Screen

The very popular Piotroski screen is living up to its name of uncovering strong businesses with great fundamentals based on Piotroskies 9 point system.

(If you sign up to receive articles with your email, you can download the latest Piotroski spreadsheet as well as 8 other stock spreadsheets)

Best 5 Performers

• Domino’s Pizza [[DPZ]] : +49.4%
• Dollar Tree [[DLTR]] : +33%
• Tractor Supply [[TSCO]] : 30.8%
• 99 Cents Only Stores [NDN]] : +30.3%
• The Hershey Company [[HSY]] : +27.8%

Worst 5 Performers

• LodgeNet Interactive [[LNET]] : -40.4%
• Quest Diagnostics [[DGX]] : -20.7%
• Ambassadors Group [[EPAX]] : -13.6%
• Central Garden & Pet Co. [[CENT]] : -11.8%
• SAIC [[SAI]] : -10.7%

Remaining screens will be covered in the next article.

Disclosure

None

JAKKS Pacific, Inc. (JAKK)

JAKK [[JAKK]]] makes and sells toys, craft and pet products. The company hasn’t been able to recover its stock price from the 2008 crash unlike most companies. JAKK like any other company has its risks.

I’m not a fan of toy companies because customers are unlikely to buy the same toy twice. I don’t recall ever having bought two power rangers or ninja turtles.

In other words, without increasing the diversity of products, sales will be affected.

Also consider that it’s main source of revenue are its big three customers, Walmart, Target and Toys R Us as well as a joint venture with THQ in the video gaming segment. The profit from this venture isn’t huge, but it is profitable.

Despite these risks, JAKK is a consistent profitable company and very much deserves to be watched.

Some good points include

• CROIC is back in the teens after dropping to 9.5% in 2008.
• 8% of sales is converted to FCF. Above 5% is considered good.
• Tangible book value has been increasing for the past 5 years.

JAKK Valuation

• Current stock price: $14.53
• DCF: $27.21, assuming a FCF growth rate of 6% and 15% discount rate
• Graham Value: $16.14, assuming EPS of $1.10 with 5.5% EPS growth
• EPV: $16.83, adjusted normalized income of $50m and 11% discount rate

You can also perform your own valuation by downloading the free spreadsheets when signing up to the mailing list or using the intrinsic value calculator.

Iteris Inc (ITI)

ITI [[ITI]] operates in the traffic management market focusing on the development and application of advanced technologies that reduce traffic congestion, minimize the environmental impact of traffic congestion and improve the safety of surface transportation systems infrastructure.

Adam from Value Uncovered has written up a good analysis on ITI in the value investing forum which I recommend you to read.

• Current stock price: $1.45
• DCF: $2.03, assuming a FCF growth rate of 0% and 15% discount rate
• Graham Value: $2.90, assuming EPS of $0.43 with 0% EPS growth
• EPV: $2.44, adjusted normalized income of $12.71m and 15% discount rate

As you can see, these are very conservative valuations based on down-cycle numbers.

Spartan Motors (SPAR)

I added SPAR [[SPAR]] to the OSV passive portfolio, which is up 10% YTD by the way, and it is the worst performer in the group of holdings. Down 33% from when I added it. I found it to be cheap back then but what about now?

Spartan Motors, Inc. is an engineer and manufacturer in the heavy-duty, custom vehicles marketplace.

FCF is hard to predict due to the cyclic nature and the big changes yoy. Net margin has also been slashed which is a very worrisome sign as there wasn’t much of a buffer to begin with. With a 2.7% net margin in 2009 and TTM net margin of 1.3% SPAR may remain in the down cycle for a while longer as costs are squeezed.

The bright side is that despite announced Q2 loss announced on Jul 23rd, the stock price dropped only 4%.

From personal experience when I invested in IGOI, when a company announces bad results or news with little effect on the stock price, it is a sign that there is 0% optimism for the company which only means a huge upside if the company surprises and provides ok results.

• Current stock price: $4.42
• DCF: $8.61, assuming a FCF growth rate of 0% and 19% discount rate
• Graham Value: $11.84, assuming EPS of $0.5 with 0% EPS growth
• EPV: $3.67, adjusted normalized income of $28m and 15% discount rate

Disclosure

None

A company can be valued in 3 dimensions – quality, value and growth.

It’s highly unlikely that you will be able to find a company deserving 5 stars for all three categories. They are rare but do exist in uncertain markets when people start to sell equities and run to bonds and other safe havens.

Another dimension that people sometimes include is momentum, but I will leave that out in this post.

A great discussion of the QVG model is provided in the book, Active Value Investing, for those interested in learning more.

GameStop (GME)

• Quality: Yes
• Value: Yes
• Growth: Yes

Quality: Yes

GME [[GME]] has been king of the gaming retailers for quite some time. The company has been able to deliver solid FCF through the years. From 2008 to 2010, GME was able to increase FCF from $325m to $480m which is a 47% increase. Very impressive despite difficult times and declines in same store sales of 1.6%. The stock price has dropped quite considerably since the peak and the guidance of lower same stores is also what seems to be keeping the stock price at where it is.

Management has also been equally impressive. Over the past 5 years, the rolling median figures are as follows.

You can see that most of the numbers are higher for the 5 year medians which goes to show that GME has continually improved in all aspects.

Value: Yes

Revisiting the company shows that GME is in value territory. With all the hype and expectation mostly gone since 2007, the current price looks good indeed.

My assumptions were fairly conservative for all three valuation methods. Growth was set to 13% and a discount rate of 12% produced the numbers below. If I lowball the projected FCF figures for the next year, I still get a DCF of $40 which is a 45% margin of safety.

A quick P/E

Growth: Yes

If the market is supposedly forward looking, it clearly looks to be wrong on GME. The company has proven that it can grow both the top and bottom line, and the used game market is consistently generating billions in revenue for the company.

FCF growth has slowed slightly, with the percentage change from 2007 – 2009 period being the lowest at 12.4%, but FCF has easily grown above 10% each year.

GME Stock Valuation Overview

Key Tronic Corp (KTCC)

• Quality: No
• Value: Yes
• Growth: No

KTCC [[KTCC]] is an example of a company that has only one of the three traits but has produced extraordinary returns for investors.

Quality: No

A micro cap with inconsistent operations. FCF is usually negative each year. Management’s ability to generate cash off its investment is usually negative and the company is in a tough, low margin industry.

Value: Yes

KTCC was clearly on a fire sale early last year. The current price of $5.50 may still be attractive as the company looks to be coming off a successful year of profits.

Growth: No

Considering the numbers and history of the company, growth is extremely difficult to predict. It would be best to leave out growth expectations and base opinions on the asset base and operations.

KTCC Stock Valuation Overview

Books-A-Million (BAMM)

• Quality: Yes
• Value: Yes
• Growth: No

Quality: Yes

BAMM [[BAMM]] is a well run company with very solid results. Their margins are rock solid and the reason why I like BAMM is because of the way the business was run over the past 2-3 years in difficult situations.

Both top and bottom line profits are consistent, although there hasn’t been growth.

The 5yr and 10yr numbers are basically the same so there hasn’t been many hiccups with how stores were run.

The cause of concern that could turn quality from a yes to a no is how well its $3m investment in a 2 store frozen yogurt franchise will work, and being a family run business, it’s important to know how shareholder friendly the Anderson family is.

Value: Yes

Didn’t change anything in my assumptions. Since the numbers for the company has been flat for the past 5 years, it was real easy to value.

If BAMM just does what it is doing now the intrinsic value is at $15. Even the NCAV alone is $13.51 and since the book value, and reproduction value is close, BAMM should be valued as a no growth company.

Growth: No

Competitors consist of Barnes and Noble, Borders, Amazon as well as other discount retailers like WalMart. Margins are low with brick and mortar stores with books being discretionary items.

There is also the whole fuss about how ebook readers are revolutionizing the industry, but from personal experience, I find ebook readers to be less efficient.

I’m the type of person who underlines, highlights and scribbles notes everywhere. To do that with any reader, I would have to go through about 3-4 menus before I can do even one.

Apple has also beaten Amazon in the ebook pricing war. If you go to Amazon, you will see that ebooks now cost just as much as a regular book. Not many $10 titles anymore.

BAMM Stock Valuation Overview

Disclosure

I hold BAMM at the time of writing