Quick Concise Comments on 20 Stocks

Written by

Jae Jun

follow me on



Last week I decided to start going through a list of 2o0 small companies. These companies were determined to be fast growers in 2009. Two years later the growers have succeeded in returning shareholders with impressive equity returns, while the laggers now find themselves in a down cycle.

The order in which I’m going through the companies is a simple ratio of the current price divided by the 2009 price. The lower the ratio, the more the stock has fallen in two years.

My Process of Filtering the List

I’m not doing anything complex. I load the company up onto the stock valuation program because it is much too early to be digging the SEC archives for past 10 years of data.

I then quickly go through each of the financial statements, taking note of the margins, growth in shareholders equity, debt and share count. I then glance at the FCF / owner earnings numbers to determine how well the company is run.

This quick rundown through the financial statements lets me identify whether a company is a good candidate. If so, I move onto looking at specific metrics that I like (I’ve previously listed the best 15 financial ratios). These ratios help me to understand whether the strength of the company and to get a better picture on whether the odds of the stock being a value trap.

If I want to value a particular stock, I’ll use the DCF, Graham formula, EPV, absolute PE as well as a EBIT multiple calculation. I have all this set up so it really only takes me about 3 minutes to get a valuation using all 5 methods.

20 Stocks and Going Strong

I’m only going to list the first 20. My commentary on each stock below will be concise and to the point. Feel free to disagree.

There have been discussions up in the forum as well. If you don’t like this short list format, leave a comment and I can write in more details of the ones that I plan to do further research on.

BAMM: Previous holding of mine. Selling for less than book value. Company cannot make more than cost of capital to grow. Operations were flat but now it has produced losses. Big family ownership but the trend of the industry makes BAMM a value trap. Intrinsic value will come down to meet price.

CTRN: retailer of urban fashion. Pretty sure there are better competitors as investments.

TKLC: telecom network solutions company. No moat. EPV is less than Repr. NCAV makes up 50%. Intrinsic value doesn’t rise. Asset play at best.

CPLA: Dependent on favorable budgets from government for education sector. Is CPLA one of those affected?
Buying back stock, no LT debt, strong balance sheet, increasing FCF without much divergence from owner earnings is good sign. EPV = 2x Repr. Moat.

STRA: Much like CPLA. Has fallen ALOT since 2009 when it looked way overvalued. How much of STRA is dependent on government funding? Cash converting MACHINE.  Greater than 30% CROIC. Moat of EPV/Repr = 100/30 = 3

LINC: For profit education company. Much the same as CPLA, STRA. Margins are more stable than the others. Is TTM figure reliable or will it be affected even more? Past 2 yr CROIC above 15%. Doesn’t look sustainable based on history.

ERII: short history. BIG drop in margins.Strong balance sheet though (how was the balance sheet financed? Equity dilution?) Very low CROIC. Not worth it.

BVX: small medical device company. FCF shows history of losses. immediate pass.

BRLI: very good financials. All margins consistent for 10 years. But what is the growth driver? No moat business. Looks fairly priced at this level. Good CROIC, ROA, ROE.

AFAM: Recently hit by Obama healthcare. good FCF, reduced debt in past 2 years. Very strong recent 5 year growth.

PETS: Pet pharmacy. VERY strong balance sheet but latest year seeing difficult results. Buying back a lot of shares and paying 5% dividend. Margins decreasing for 4 years and will be 5th year of decline = eroding moat. EBIT will likely be 12%

LHCG: Home healthcare company. Like AFAM. Good numbers but dependent on government whims.

NCIT: NCI, Inc. (NCI) is a provider of information technology (IT), engineering, logistics, and professional services and solutions to Federal Government agencies. Stay away from anything that is too connected to government. Their spending is based on budgets. Decreasing margins, big jump in TTM debt.

NTRI: Gross margins have been consistent but net margin in decline as well as FCF. No moat biz and a discretionary item. Could be a turnaround company but not counting on it. If business keeps declining, fair value looks to be at about $10.

DGIT: Good FCF, increasing CROIC in the past year and operations all around. Company looks to have turned around since 2009. Current price is close to no growth value. Can the company earn better returns than the cost of capital? P/FCF is 6-7 which is cheap.

DLB: Excluded from Windows 8 caused 30-40% drop. Everything else is good. Management has a big stake, numbers are excellent, growth is slowing because of drops in PC sales, but other audio channels such as content boxes are available. Conservative estimates put DLB at the lower range of valuation  at current prices. If windows 8 drop was overdone, fair price should be $40.

ROCM: Good revenue growth and margins but cant convert it down to bottom line. Tell tale of weak management and competitive pressures as expenses are high in order to make sales.

STRL: Issues debt and equity financing to get money. Thin margins in contracting and consulting business. MRQ shows big drop in cash as well. Nothing entirely impressive. Mediocre company.

TESS: 1.-2% net margin. Razor thin. Margins currently at the low range. If it increases slightly valuation can go up but is difficult with the business model. Debt is constantly increasing. Doesnt decrease. Capital structure doesn’t look very good.

IIVI: Doesnt look cheap in terms of metrics. P/FCF of 36, P/tangBV of 2.7 is not cheap. Margins are stable and look to be on the rise. Does work for government (?). According to spreadsheet, received a lot of income from “other cash flow”. Need to see where this comes from in more detail. EPV = Repr. No moat.

Disclosure: Long DLB

  • Pranay

    Thanks for the good analysis on the 20!
    DLB: Few additional points:
    – New & young CEO has taken over.So that also may have caused some of the impact.
    – Company did contract a little on margins esp. on the licensing business, but seems to be making a reversal. However products business is showing sharp swings in margin, but is a small share of the revenues.
    – Company is getting stronger on 3D audio solutions, and with the 3D movie market growing it may hold promise.
    – Lastly, in the mobile apps market like iTunes and Android apps, the company has not made a huge dent – but still part of quite a few apps. However, revenue streams are not very clear to me. Possibly with time they will mature in this model.
    – Huge moat: Only company of it’s kind in the audio solutions industry.
    – Carries very little goodwill compared to many other tech companies
    – Has not done any follish overpriced takeovers to erode the balance sheet
    – Has numerous patents in its favour

  • Pranay

    Thanks for the analysis on 20!
    Regading DLB, in my humble opinion may I add:
    – New young CEO in charge: maybe that has created some impact & the price drop
    – Margins stable again after a drop on licensing business, but products business margins swing widely
    – Huge moat: no other company as well rounded in audio solutions
    – 3D audio solutions growing – and the 3D movie business is expanding so may be good for them
    – Mobile apps like itunes, not a strong player yet (so it seems)
    – Very well managed good will number – not overbloated like many tech companies
    – Has not done follish overprices takeovers & thus preserving shareholder value

  • Pingback: Sunday Link-Fest | ValueWalk.com()

  • @ Pranay,

    DLB will now take several years before we know the outcome. For now I’ll have to continue holding. Thought i bought at a reasonable price, but i guess it wasn’t cheap enough.

  • Pranay

    Jae Jun
    Yes it may – though we both beleive in the company so long it shows promise & valuation worth holding – price wasn’t cheap for me either, but your article on ‘contratrian ups & downs’ was encouraging.

    However, your proposed checklist of 40 was long. Gramhan had 10 points and you distilled to the preferred 4. I prefer your simplification approaches better.

    Thanks for being a young, yet ‘Old school value investor’ & coach 🙂

  • Thanks. I couldn’t take credit for the checklist but those 40 points are good. Doubt any company will meet everything, but it’s a good start.

  • Pingback: 200 Companies from 2009 Revisited and Revalued()

  • Pingback: BullseyeMicrocaps.com » Forbes’s 2009 ‘Best Small Companies’ Revisited()

Ready to try Old School Value?