2009-07-03

Is It Time to Sell Boeing?

In case you couldn't guess from last month's test flight cancellation, or the subsequent cancellation of 15 orders for the 787 Dreamliner, all's not well at Boeing (NYSE: BA). The latest news, that Boeing is in negotiations to take one of its suppliers in-house, just confirms it.

On Wednesday, widespread reports pegged Boeing as closing in on purchasing Vought Aircraft, a South Carolina facility that makes sections of the 787's fuselage. Boeing bulls argue this is good news, with The Wall Street Journal this morning putting on a happy face, arguing that:

  • "Boeing... needs to take a more direct role in the manufacturing process of its marquee product."
  • Boeing erred in outsourcing too much 787 work to suppliers like Honeywell (NYSE: HON), United Technologies (NYSE: UTX), Spirit AeroSystems (NYSE: SPR) ... and Vought. "Bringing more of the production in-house could increase Boeing's ability to manage the complex project."
  • Buying the South Carolina operation "potentially paves the way for a second 787 assembly line."

I disagree.

The party line
Oh, I admit that the Journal's minor premises have merit. Boeing's troubles with its supply chain are well documented, and berthing suppliers at the mothership could help unkink the chain. Also, seeing as the 787 is already two years behind schedule, opening a second assembly line to accelerate production and delivery to impatient customers like AMR (NYSE: AMR), Delta (NYSE: DAL), and Continental (NYSE: CAL) may be prudent.

But while there's logic to the party line, for my part, I prefer to ...

Read between the lines
And what I see there is Boeing admitting that as bad a state as the 787 program appears to be in, it's in fact quite a bit worse than Boeing lets on. Up until a few weeks ago, we'd been led to believe that Boeing had generally gotten its problems under control. The Dreamliner's maiden voyage was on schedule. Actual delivery of the plane was just around the corner.

Investors who slapped the snooze alarm and dreamed happy dreams through last month's test-flight buzz, however, cannot afford to ignore the resurgent alarm bells today. You need to ask yourself: If all is well, the structural weak spots that forced the test flight's cancellation will soon be fixed, and production put back on track ... then why did Boeing feel it necessary to bring more manufacturing in-house today?

This Week in Solar

Canadian Solar (Nasdaq: CSIQ) kicked the week off on a positive note, with an announcement that the firm had "recently signed or reconfirmed sales contracts, contract extensions or received purchase orders for delivery of about 120MW of solar module products." Of course, that was too wordy for the press release's headline, which simply read "Canadian Solar Announces 120MW of Recent Sales Orders." Same difference, right?

Rather than slam CSI for this bit of spin, I will point out that this announcement follows the firm's decision a few weeks ago to restart its module expansion program. Further, one of CSI's customers, an integrator by the name of Systaic, spoke in the release of the improving financing environment in its native Germany, and the bankability of CSI-powered solar plants. That's more than PR fluff.

On Tuesday, Suntech Power (NYSE: STP) pulled down a $50 million loan from the IFC, a division of the World Bank. I'm not sure if it was this financing, or the rumors of a giant new solar project in the Sichuan province of China, but some analysts hiked their ratings on the solar slugger the following day.

By Friday, it was confirmed by Suntech reps that the firm had indeed entered into "a non-binding strategic agreement similar to our agreement with the Qinghai government," referring to an equally mammoth 500-megawatt project that came to light earlier this month.

Also seeing some Chinese love this week was Yingli Green Energy (NYSE: YGE), which pulled down a much more modest 10MW project. I'm increasingly getting the sense that hometown heroes are going to have a near-lock on the Chinese market for the foreseeable future, which poses an interesting medium-term challenge for outsiders like SunPower (Nasdaq: SPWRA) (Nasdaq: SPWRB) and First Solar (Nasdaq: FSLR).

The Best Stock to Own

Do you have a very best stock? A stock that brings you closer to retirement year in and year out? One like Kraft, formerly American Dairy Products, which -- as tracked back by Dr. Jeremy Siegel -- turned $1,000 into more than $2 million over 53 years with dividend reinvestment? In terms of returns, Kraft has quite literally been the very best stock of the past half-century.

I pay special attention to this stuff: My job is to find companies with the same magic that's made Kraft such a dynamite stock.

A repeatable fortune
What's the secret of Kraft's phenomenal digits? Well-branded products that a lot of people use, for starters. While that may be the bulk of it, those products aren't its only source of juju. The rest comes from two magic words: dividend reinvestment.

Don't think these words are powerful? Take a ho-hum stock -- or at least one that appears that way -- paying 5% in dividends yearly and racking up a modest 5% in capital appreciation. Start with $1,000 and reinvest those dividends. After 30 years, you'll have amassed a whopping $18,700!

The other side of the coin is that you could get those returns -- or better -- from a strong growth stock, but the dividend stock above gives you the flexibility to switch from reinvestment to an income strategy. In that example, you'd get almost $900 a year. Besides, which one do you think is the safer bet?

A few ideas for you
Paying dividends to shareholders also forces companies to exercise fiscal discipline. That's great, because being flush with cash tempts managers -- let's face it, they tend to have big egos -- to bungle their loads. And even if they don't slip up, they tend to hoard that cash away from shareholders without putting it to any use. That's why Microsoft's long-anticipated one-time $3-per-share dividend payout meant so much to shareholders, and why cash hoarders like Oracle (Nasdaq: ORCL) are underserving their owners.

In a way, dividends encourage responsibility -- something that strikes a personal nerve with me. As co-advisor of The Motley Fool's dividend stock newsletter, Income Investor, I'm always on the lookout for corporations paying solid dividends, like the stocks I'll share with you now.

Like Kraft, Procter & Gamble (NYSE: PG) has an enormous portfolio of well-branded products that a lot of people use. Its brands include Pringles, Crest, Duracell, and Bounty. At 3.4%, its yield isn't enormous, but its ability to generate free cash flow is quite impressive.

Speaking of companies with strong brands, I'm taking a hard look at Mattel, which manufactures a portfolio of iconic toys, including Barbie, Hot Wheels, Fisher-Price, and Matchbox. Competitor Hasbro (NYSE: HAS) is generating a lot of press with its Transformers franchise. But I believe Mattel has the stronger position when it comes to products and is very well-situated to market them with A-list partners like Dreamworks (NYSE: DWA). The 4.7% dividend yield should make the wait that much easier.  

But you needn't limit yourself to the world of consumer staples if you're thirsty for some action. Examine StatoilHydro (NYSE: STO), a big name in North Sea energy exploration and distribution. The company has been battered by declining energy prices across the world, but remains well-positioned to serve energy-thirsty consumers in Norway, the U.S., and the rest of Europe. Like competitors British Petroleum (NYSE: BP) or ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM), StatoilHydro should benefit from a long-term increase in fossil-fuel demand. Plus, you'll be collecting a healthy 3% dividend yield along the way.

2009-07-02

5 Stocks With a Bright Future

Investments that have been successful over the long term almost assuredly share at least one thing in common -- growth. You'll be able to find very few companies that have been unable to increase their earnings and yet still produce good returns for shareholders.

Think about it this way: Dividends aside, investors reap their gains when a company's stock price goes up. The stock price is typically driven by two levers -- earnings and the multiple that investors are willing to pay for those earnings. Since earnings multiples tend to fluctuate within a certain range, long-term investors should have a keen focus on the company's ability to increase earnings.

Does it seem too simple? Maybe keeping it simple is a good plan sometimes. After all, as Third Avenue's Marty Whitman has put it:

Based on my own personal experience -- both as an investor in recent years and an expert witness in years past -- rarely do more than three or four variables really count. Everything else is noise.

With that in mind, I've kept it simple and dug up five stocks that analysts expect will notch long-term earnings growth of 10% or better. I've also pulled up the CAPS rating for each stock to show what the 135,000-member Motley Fool's CAPS community thinks of the company's prospects.

Company

Expected Long-Term
EPS Growth Rate

Forward P/E

CAPS rating
(out of 5)

Buffalo Wild Wings (Nasdaq: BWLD)

23%

16

***

Research In Motion (Nasdaq: RIMM)

23%

15

**

GameStop (NYSE: GME)

16%

7

***

Noble Corp. (NYSE: NE)

13%

5

*****

Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC)

11%

14

***

Sources: Capital IQ, a division of Standard & Poor's, Yahoo! Finance, and CAPS. EPS = earnings per share. P/E = price-to-earnings ratio.

Wall Street analysts aren't known for being supernatural in their forecasting skills, so not all of these estimates may pan out. However, this list may be a good place to dig in for further research. I'll get you started with some thoughts on a couple of these stocks.

Cool to the touch
I imagine that most of you already know Research In Motion as the maker of the BlackBerry smartphone, which has the business market on lockdown. If you've somehow missed the BlackBerry phenomenon, let's just say it was one of the first mobile devices to make the "smart" in smartphone seem like more than a clever name.

A host of competitors have caught wind of the massive opportunity in the smartphone market though, and today RIMM faces increasing competition from folks like Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL), Nokia, and Palm (Nasdaq: PALM). Heck, even Google is getting into the mix.

The growing war zone in the smartphone market has spooked enough CAPS members to help sink RIMM's stock to a lackluster two-star rating.

Bringing the heat
But what about high growth and a high rating from the CAPS community? For that we can turn to Noble Corp.

The world needs oil, and the ocean floor has got it. Lucky for us there are companies out there like Noble, which provide offshore drilling services for sites that are anywhere from slightly underwater to thousands of feet below the surface.

While oil prices have been more volatile than an intoxicated Eagles fan at the Meadowlands, CAPS members by and large have stuck to their faith in the long-term potential of oil and related companies.

But why Noble in particular? Let's take a look at what CAPS All-Star MattH42004 had to say earlier this year:

Noble has a lot of things going for it, including a very strong balance sheet. With over 500 million in cash and only 180 million in debt coming due over the next five years, Noble clearly has the financial ability to maneuver through the difficult times ahead. Their [fleet] utilization is still strong, and looking into the future, their deepwater rigs will be able to command a premium when oil prices return back to a normal range.

Beware of These Cheap Stocks

Not too long ago, one of our Motley Fool Global Gains subscribers emailed me and asked me to take a look at a company called Orient Paper (OPAI.OB). Though the stock was Chinese, small, and traded over the counter, it had piqued his interest because it looked so darn cheap.

As I began my own research, I quickly confirmed that yes, this stock looked darn cheap. At $0.55 per share (its price at that point), it had a $25 million market cap and was trading for less than 1 times sales and 2 times EBITDA.

The story does not end there
After studying Orient Paper's SEC filings, however, I came away with five troubling questions:

First, until just last month, the company had a 25-year-old CFO who had worked in that position since she was 23 or so. That seems like an awfully young and inexperienced C-level officer for a publicly traded company. Given that so many small public Chinese companies struggle with internal controls even after they've hired qualified CFOs and auditors, one has to wonder if Orient Paper has the same issues.

Second, the company keeps extraordinarily low levels of inventory (just 2% of sales) while larger peers such as International Paper (NYSE: IP) and Boise (NYSE: BZ) keep 9% to 13% of sales in inventory. How can Orient Paper maintain such small inventories and produce such significant sales growth, and what does that mean for the sustainability of the growth story here?

Third, the company has a volatile customer list (with major customers appearing and then disappearing from one year to the next), yet has no advertising expenses and extremely low SG&A expenses. If the company is not keeping customers and not spending to promote itself to new customers, how is it getting business? The 10-K tells us that the company relies on its CEO for his "personal and business contacts." But while contacts are a very good thing to have in China, you don't ever want to be part-owner of a company that relies entirely on the relationships of one key individual.

Fourth, the company seems content to use its shares as currency, despite its seemingly low valuation. For evidence of that, note the 5 million shares the company issued to pay a $500,000 consulting bill in 2008. What does this mean for how it will treat outside shareholders going forward?

Finally, multiple insiders have loaned money to the company at charitably low rates to fund working capital. If this company is financially strong, why can't it source bank debt or, better, self-fund?

Nor does it end there
After posting these questions on my blog, I received a response from Orient Paper's new CFO, Winston Yen. While you can read his full response for yourself, he confirmed that the company is very good at managing its inventories, turning pulp into finished customer orders within days. He also noted that the company used the proceeds from its related-party loans to add a production line and that the company would not have been able to do so otherwise. And he asserted that the company's consistently low levels of accounts receivable show an operation that is legitimate and efficient.

On the other hand, we have to take his word that the financial compliance in place at the company is solid, he had no explanation for why the company can't get bank debt to fund growth, and he had "no comment" on the bizarre share issuance to former consultants.

The point of this story
Now, if you find Mr. Yen's answers to be satisfactory, then buy Orient Paper because, yes, it does look cheap. I, however, will be watching and waiting for at least a little while longer to try and verify the quality of the business.

See, high-quality businesses don't normally sell for dirt-cheap valuations -- note Google's (Nasdaq: GOOG) enterprise value-to-EBITDA ratio of 13. That's particularly true of high-quality businesses in a fast-growing economy like China's -- Baidu.com (Nasdaq: BIDU) trades for 46 times EBITDA. But it's also not impossible. Thanks to the recent market downturn, there are more than 100 Chinese companies trading on the U.S. exchanges today for less than 5 times EBITDA.

Are they all bargains? Of course not. But at Global Gains, we think there will be significant long-term rewards for investors who are willing to be patient and carefully study the likes of Orient Paper, SORL Auto Parts (Nasdaq: SORL), Noah Education (NYSE: NED), and Linktone (Nasdaq: LTON) among others.

The key, though, is that you don't just want to find a cheap stock. You want to find a cheap stock that aligns you with a high-quality, scalable business whose management team you trust to allocate capital effectively.

More on that last point
This is why we travel to China every year at Global Gains to investigate and meet a collection of promising companies and management teams. And while some scare us away, others make us that much more confident. In fact, during each of our past two trips, we uncovered a stock that's since more than doubled. (Read more about that here.)

This Week's 5 Smartest Stock Moves

If you're feeling good about the market, you're not alone. Take my hand as we go over some of this week's more uplifting headlines.

1. Amazon knows how to cross the state line
First it was North Carolina. Now it's Rhode Island and Hawaii. Amazon.com (Nasdaq: AMZN) is booting affiliates in states that are threatening to pass legislation that would force Amazon to charge and collect taxes at the state level.

The bills suggest that Amazon has a presence in their states, even if it's just a hobbyist train collector who uses Amazon ads on his free-hosted blog to earn a little commissionable revenue from the world's leading online retailer.

My heart goes out to members of the Amazon Associates program in North Carolina and Rhode Island, but the e-tailer is doing the right thing. Competition is cutthroat in cyberspace, and delivered pricing is everything. Besides, unlike smaller chains that live and die by affiliate marketing, Amazon has evolved over the years. Shoppers go to Amazon.com directly because they know it carries just about anything. It won't lose out on a whole lot of revenue. The only real losers are the states that figured they would fatten their collections, only to realize that they will actually shrink as web-entrepreneurs residing in their states earn less taxable income.

2. Netflix is one in a million  
Three years after daring data-hungry developers to top its proprietary Cinematch flick-recommendation platform, Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX) may finally have a winner. A multi-national team has apparently topped the requirement to nab a $1 million award from Netflix, besting the Cinematch system baseline by 10% or better.

Thousands of teams have been trying to improve on the Netflix data-mining functionality that spits out DVD recommendations based on rental histories and star ratings. Whether it's the money or the academia, the challenge has generated a lot of publicity for Netflix.

For starters, the fact that it's taken roughly three years is a testament to the original Cinematch platform. If thousands of frenzied teams of brainiacs took this long to improve it, how will any other company rival Netflix for getting into the psyche of the couch potato and knowing just what they'll want to see next?

Well played, Netflix. It's a million bucks well spent.

3. Satellite radio: Born to run
You know you're nimble when you're able to launch a 24/7 Michael Jackson tribute channel less than two days after the iconic pop singer died. Sirius XM Radio (Nasdaq: SIRI) then kept the event-driven programming coming, announcing 4th of July content that includes a Bruce Springsteen concert (that will be recorded today in Germany), a live Jamie Foxx Independence Day show from Las Vegas, and a child psychiatry marathon on its health and medical channel.

Is it any surprise that the company also decided to extend CEO Mel Karmazin's term this week, bumping up his pay in the process? Shares of Sirius XM may be trading for jukebox change, but it's hard to fathom the merger between Sirius and XM even being attempted by anyone other than the bold Karmazin at the helm.

4. Let's go logrolling
After a dozen mostly successful IPOs during the second quarter, the third quarter got off to a strong start with yesterday's debut LogMeIn (Nasdaq: LOGM). The remote connectivity specialist priced its IPO at $16. It popped at the open to $20, closing at $20.02.

Is a market cap of nearly $430 million justifiable for a company that has posted annual losses in each of the past three years, clocking in with revenue of just $51.7 million last year? Mr. Market seems to think so.

It certainly helps that LogMeIn is growing quickly, with 22.1 million registered users and counting. It also began 2009 with a healthy first quarter profit. 

5. Gosh, Oshkosh
Shares of Oshkosh (NYSE: OSK) soared 27% yesterday, after the company was awarded a $1 billion military contract for its armored mine-resistant vehicles. It's not every day that a company wins an order that is roughly the size of its market cap.

Oshkosh beat out larger contractors like General Dynamics (NYSE: GD) and Navistar (NYSE: NAV) for the order, but it's willing to share the love. Oshkosh plans to subcontract some of the work to its disappointed rivals.

Another Day, Another Hot IPO

LogMeIn (Nasdaq: LOGM) became the latest IPO to be warmly received by the market.

Shares of the on-demand connectivity specialist opened at $20 this morning after pricing its offering of nearly 6.7 million debutante shares at $16.

LogMeIn claims that it connects 70 million devices worldwide, affording clients the luxury of logging in to remote PCs and servers. It oversaw 188,000 premium accounts as of the end of March, 54% more than it had on its rolls a year earlier. And it has a whopping total of 22.1 million registered users.

On the not-so-bright side, LogMeIn rang up revenue of just $51.7 million last year. It has also posted annual losses over the past few years. So, on the surface, this is an unlikely IPO candidate. With 21.4 million shares outstanding after this morning's offering, even the now-obsolete $16 price bestows a steep $342 million market cap on the company.

However, growth sells, and LogMeIn has it in strides. Revenue soared by 139% in 2007 and climbed by a healthy 92% last year. If the lack of historical profitability is a concern, take heart: The company was comfortably in the black during this year's first quarter. Pre-tax profit margins were nearly 15%, and Uncle Sam's bites should be minimal as the company works through years of tax-loss carry-forwards. Now that the company has apparently turned the corner on the bottom line, its scalable model should deliver healthy profitability in the future.

Growth is the key. A dozen companies went public during this year's second quarter, consisting mostly of names that are growing in this daunting environment. For the most part, those willing to take the risk to become an IPO's first investors have been duly rewarded.

Stock

IPO

6/30/09

Change

Changyou.com (Nasdaq: CYOU)

$16.00

$38.38

140%

Bridgepoint Education (NYSE: BPI)

$10.50

$17.00

62%

Rosetta Stone (Nasdaq: RST)

$18.00

$27.44

52%

DigitalGlobe (NYSE: DGI)

$19.50

$19.20

(2%)

SolarWinds (NYSE: SWI)

$12.50

$16.49

32%

OpenTable (Nasdaq: OPEN)

$20.00

$30.17

51%

LogMeIn is kicking off the third quarter in the same fashion.

The valuation still appears a bit rich. The moat doesn't appear as wide as we've seen with OpenTable and its mastery over online restaurant reservations, nor with Rosetta Stone and its language software. Remote connectivity will continue to be a competitive niche. However, until LogMeIn's torrid growth slows or its initial profitability cracks, it's hard to bet against this morning's red-hot debutante.

The important question is this: Do you think the IPO is a good buying opportunity? Or will the stock need to cool off from the IPO hype? Let our community know what you think -- head over to Motley Fool CAPS and share your thoughts with the other 135,000 members that are currently part of the community. Even if you'd prefer to pass on LogMeIn, you can check out a couple of the other stocks listed above or any of the 5,300 stocks that are rated on CAPS.

2009-07-01

TOP STOCKS:Protect Your Portfolio From a Weakening Dollar

There's something lurking out there in the shadows that will likely weaken the dollar -- and your portfolio along with it. Fortunately, there's a way to defeat this dark force.

In March, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown promised to "bring the shadow banking system and tax havens under the regulatory net." What exactly is the shadow banking system, and why does it matter to you?

The Financial Times summarized it nicely: "A plethora of opaque institutions and vehicles have sprung up in American and European markets this decade, and they have come to play an important role in providing credit across the financial system." [Emphasis mine.] These opaque institutions and vehicles have names like "asset-backed commercial paper," "credit default obligations," "structured investment vehicles," and "derivatives." Their role in providing credit in the last decade was substantial. Bob Janjuah, a credit analyst at Royal Bank of Scotland, estimates that in the past two years, the shadow banking system accounted for half of all net credit creation in the United States.

Out of the darkness, into the light
When trust evaporated among participants in this hidden system, the current financial crisis was born. Ben Bernanke likened it to an old-fashioned bank run, telling The Washington Post, "We were seeing variants of classic panic behavior" in 2007 and 2008 when markets for certain asset-backed securities froze.

Having lost their appetite for products like mortgage-backed securities, it seems that everyone is trying to exit the system at once. Economist Paul Krugman points out that, "People aren't pulling cash out of banks to put it in their mattresses -- but they're doing the modern equivalent, pulling their money out of the shadow banking system and putting it into Treasury bills." This phenomenon drove yields on Treasuries down to historic lows, with the three-month T-bill briefly going negative (in effect, a guarantee that the purchaser would lose money on their investment). This flight to safety has led to the dollar's short-term strength.

Slow down -- you move too fast
However, the unwinding of this system means there are now a lot more dollars in the global financial system. Because the shadow banking system essentially found itself in a liquidity trap, the Federal Reserve has flooded the system with dollars to prevent a collapse. However, when confidence returns, investors will want to own something other than Treasuries. The flight out of safety and back into the market will mean a weaker dollar on the global stage.

Now that all these derivatives have come to light, what's the average American investor to do?

Light at the end of the tunnel
I recently asked Foolish colleague Tim Hanson, who heads our Global Gains advisory service, about this very conundrum: how to protect a portfolio against a weaker dollar. Should American investors be satisfied owning stocks of American companies that are seeing large growth from emerging markets, names like Deere (NYSE: DE), General Electric (NYSE: GE), and Yum! Brands (NYSE: YUM)? Or should investors weight their portfolios heavily with foreign companies that trade on U.S. exchanges and generate revenue in currencies other than the dollar?

Tim's answer was, of course, to do both. Own quality American companies -- like Intuitive Surgical (Nasdaq: ISRG), which has already begun to move into the Chinese market, and will see much more growth overseas. At the same time, U.S. names shouldn't be your only holdings in certain sectors like energy, and owning stocks like Petrobras (NYSE: PBR) or CNOOC (NYSE: CEO) can help you diversify your stocks away from dollars exclusively.

Feelin' groovy
But Tim got a serious look on his face and told me that I also can't afford to ignore foreign small- and mid-cap stocks. Sure, there's more risk investing in foreign countries where the rules, regulations, and business conduct aren't always well understood. But with their huge upside potential, foreign small and mid caps might be your best hedge against a weak dollar.

This is why Tim and his Global Gains team are taking a third trip to Asia, on July 5, visiting with business owners and seeing operations firsthand. These companies are operating in dynamic emerging markets and have the potential for super-sized returns, and this could be your best hedge against a weak dollar. If you'd like to learn more about them, sign up to receive all of the team's free real-time dispatches from the field.

It Isn't Too Late to Buy Oil

When my in-laws traded in their car for a Prius a few years ago, I initially wondered if they were trying to save money on gas or if my retired father in-law simply wanted a new toy.

I'm a sucker for gadgets and new technology too, so I certainly couldn't blame him if he did. But by 2008 it didn't matter if gadget lust had driven the trade, because they were saving $100 a month or more on gas.

Consuming more and more
Of course, oil and gas are quite a bit cheaper now than they were last summer -- when the world struggled to cope with $147-a-barrel oil. My in-laws aren't saving nearly as much now, but I suspect they'll continue to be happy with their trade in. Toyota (NYSE: TM) should be pleased with sales of the Prius, because as the world recovers from the recession in oil consumption, emerging markets should once again put pressure on global oil supply to grow.

The table below shows just how big a factor consumption growth in emerging markets has been in the last 10 years -- and how little developed market consumption has changed.

Oil Consumption � Millions of Barrels/Day

Country

1998 Consumption

2008 Consumption

Rank

CAGR

U.S.

18.9

19.4

1

0.3%

China

4.1

8.0

2

6.9%

India

1.8

2.9

5

4.9%

Germany

2.9

2.6

6

-1.1%

Brazil

2.1

2.5

7

1.8%

Saudi Arabia

1.4

2.4

10

5.5%

World

74.1

85.4

N/A

1.4%

Source: Energy Information Agency actual and forecast data; CAGR = compound annual growth rate.

Regardless of what happens to U.S. consumption, it's the emerging markets that are creating the need for additional supply. And China's consumption clearly stands out from the pack.

Expect more of the same from China
The Energy Information Agency expects China's consumption in 2009 to be flat, largely because the recession has pushed industrial use down. With most of its GDP tied to exports, an industrial recovery will take time. But transportation consumption is another story, as China continues to sell autos at a breakneck pace. Last month another 812,000 autos were sold in China, and the country is on pace to sell more than 10 million autos this year. That's on top of last year's 9.3 million autos sold, and higher than 2009 sales expectations for the U.S.

Volkswagen has announced that it expects its 2009 sales in China to exceed its sales in Germany for the first time. Volkswagen's probably not alone either, at least not for long, because only 20 out of 1,000 people have cars in China. That compares to 800 or so per 1,000 people in the U.S. With such little consumption per capita, there is plenty of room for additional growth over the next five to 10 years. As more cars hit the road, China's oil consumption will continue to increase.

That's good news, not just for PetroChina (NYSE: PTR), but for multinationals like ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM), Chevron (NYSE: CVX), and BP (NYSE: BP), because they need steady cash flows to support the development of new fields. And it's even better news for Suncor (NYSE: SU), Petrobras (NYSE: PBR), and other firms with substantial oil sands and deep-sea assets, because these sources are substantially more expensive to develop.

All this means that despite the recession and the recent run-up in oil stocks, it's not too late to buy oil, because the long-term trends for higher demand are still in place.

China set to grow and benefit too
For its part, China needs to reduce its reliance on exports and deal with the inevitable cultural and political changes that come with economic growth and greater freedom. But because of its substantial currency reserves and infrastructure spending over the past decade, it is in a position to continue supporting the fastest economic growth story in recent history.

China's potential growth is one reason our Motley Fool Global Gains team is heading back to the country this July to meet with some promising companies we've identified through our research. If you're interesting in hearing about what we find, you can sign up to receive all of our free real-time dispatches from the field simply by providing your email address in the box below.

7 Stocks to Start You Off

Why should late-night DJs get to offer all the dedications? I hereby dedicate this article to newcomers to the investing arena, to people who've freed up some cash to invest, and to those who understand that this sluggish stock market presents them with a rare and exciting opportunity.

If you're ready to invest, you may be facing one big question: which stocks to start with. After all, there are thousands to choose from. You could take the easy (and quite reasonable) route and invest in a broad-market index fund. Even investing great Warren Buffett believes most people are better off following that strategy.

But to aim even higher, you may want to put some or all of your money in individual stocks. And in my opinion, healthy dividend payers could be the best place to start your search.

Start with reliability
To look for the cream of the crop in the dividend world, take a gander at Standard & Poor's list of Dividend Aristocrats. (My colleague Joe Magyer offers some other excellent dividend-seeking tips.)

The Aristocrats are S&P 500 companies that have increased their dividends every year for at least 25 years. Here are some Aristocrats you might consider for your portfolio, along with their dividend growth rates:

Company

Recent Dividend Yield

5-Year Average Annual Dividend Growth Rate

ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM)

2.4%

10%

Automatic Data Processing (Nasdaq: ADP)

3.7%

18%

Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO)

3.5%

12%

Walgreen (NYSE: WAG)

1.5%

21%

Eli Lilly (NYSE: LLY)

5.7%

7%

Johnson Controls (NYSE: JCI)

2.7%

17%

McDonald's (NYSE: MCD)

3.6%

32%

Sources: Standard & Poor's, MSN Money.

When evaluating dividend payers, consider more than just the current yield. A company offering a yield of 5% might seem more attractive than a company of seemingly equal quality paying 3%. But if the former company features irregular and anemic dividend increases, while the latter has averaged 12% annual hikes, that 3% will become more than a 5% effective yield for you in just a few years. And over 10 or 20 years, that accumulation could really pack a punch.

What makes dividends so important?
It's not exactly a secret: Dividends accounted for 41% of the S&P 500's return between 1926 and 2006. And according to Ned Davis Research, between January 1972 and April 2009 (a period that included booms and busts), dividend payers returned 7.8% annually, crushing the 0.7% annual return of stingier stocks.

Even if their stock itself stalls, healthy, growing companies -- like the Aristocrats above -- will keep paying you their dividend. During 2008, many solid companies actually increased their dividends.

The seven stocks I've listed for you aren't formal recommendations -- just good starting points for your own due diligence. Nor are they the only dividend candidates for your portfolio. We'd love to introduce you to some other ideas, along with some valuable lessons in dividend investing, with a free 30-day trial to our Motley Fool Income Investor advisory service. On average, its picks are beating the market handily, even as they offer an average current yield of 5.5%. Nineteen of our recommendations sport yields above 6%! Click here to learn more about a free 30-day trial (there's no obligation to subscribe).

5 Unbelievably Solid Companies

Quick test: Which of the following is false?

  • The average American's lifespan is nearly 80 years.
  • The average large American corporation's lifespan is between 20 and 50 years, depending on the source.
  • Dinosaurs still exist and can be seen roaming throughout Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, and Rhode Island.

You didn't hear about the T-Rex in Pawtucket?
Oh, OK, we'll fess up: Dinosaurs remain extinct. That means an average American outlives an average large-sized American corporation by a factor of 2 or more.

Two years ago, we wrote a column advocating that investors look for companies with the following four characteristics:

  • Built to last for 100 years or more.
  • Little-known, yet dominating their growing industries.
  • Steered by committed management teams.
  • Governed by the highest corporate values.

Little did we realize just how preposterous it is that companies would be built for "100 years or more"! In fact, according to Arie de Geus, author of The Living Company, "a full one-third of the companies listed in the 1970 Fortune 500 … had vanished by 1983 -- acquired, merged, or broken to pieces."

Professor Jeremy Siegel's meticulously researched book The Future for Investors studied the original companies of the S&P 500, which was put together in 1957. Of those 500 firms, Siegel found, just 25% survived intact to 2003! Over that 46-year span, the other 75% (fully 375 companies) went bankrupt, merged, or were taken private.       

That's our advice: Invest in unicorns and sasquatches
This doesn't invalidate our earlier advice -- that you should look to invest in businesses built to last for 100 years or more. If you can do that, after all, you'll align yourself with managers who are thinking long-term rather than short-term.

It does, however, make an elite group of U.S. businesses stand out even more -- for one shared trait that is almost as unbelievable as unicorns and sasquatches. Before we get to that trait, let's look at that List of Five:

  • Target (NYSE: TGT). Has been paying dividends every quarter since it went public in 1967.
  • Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT). Has been raising its quarterly cash dividends since it began paying a dividend in 1974, not long after it went public.
  • SYSCO (NYSE: SYY). Has paid dividends for 158 consecutive quarters (roughly 40 years).
  • Emerson Electric (NYSE: EMR). Has increased its dividend every year for 52 years.
  • General Mills (NYSE: GIS). Has paid uninterrupted dividends -- when you include the cereal king and its predecessor company -- for 110 years!

These five businesses have shown remarkable track records. What's most impressive: Each has been paying a dividend for more than 35 years.

We've written a lot about global stocks lately, but if you're a gun-shy investor looking for stocks on which to build your retirement foundation, dividend stocks are a vital arrow in your quiver.

Here's why
The benefit of dividends to shareholders is clear: You get paid cash each and every year, regardless of whether the underlying stock is up, down, or indifferent. Furthermore, you can pocket that cash or use it to buy more shares of stock. Dividends, however, also have a benefit to the companies that pay them, and we think it's no coincidence that these long-lasting companies are all dividend-payers.

That's because dividends -- and the need to be consistent in paying them once a company starts paying them -- force companies to be responsible with their cash. In fact, a recent paper by Douglas Skinner and Eugene Soltes of the University of Chicago found that dividend-paying companies have better earnings quality than their non-dividend-paying peers, and that "dividend-payers are less likely to report losses" [emphasis added]. And because companies go out of business only when they start losing money, it's clear that companies that don't lose money won't go out of business.

So there's one little secret when you're seeking companies that are being built to last 100 years: Look for stocks that pay dividends.

It's not all joy in Dividend-ville
Of course, there are no sure things, and that's just as true with longtime dividend-payers as it is in sports. Even worse, the current economic downturn has forced a number of former "dividend dynasties" to cut or even do away with their dividend -- State Street (NYSE: STT) and Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) are two high-profile examples. Thus, it's as critical now as ever to carefully scrutinize any stock you choose to invest in and diversify your portfolio broadly across a collection of superior companies.

If you're interested in doing just that, click here to join our Motley Fool Income Investor service free for 30 days. The dividend-fiends there run a model portfolio of their top dividend-stock ideas, and with yields creeping up recently as the stock market has dropped, their hunting grounds are as fertile as ever.

2009-06-30

Something Could Go Right in Banking

The name Dick Bove may not ring bells for many investors, but if you're sniffing around the stocks of U.S. banks, it's a good name to know.

It's certainly not the only name to know, as folks like Meredith Whitney and Mike Mayo, as well as some of my Foolish colleagues, including Morgan Housel, have had some interesting things to say about the financial industry. Bove, however, is particularly notable because of his persistent confidence in the banking and financial sector. Bove is senior vice president of equity research at Rochdale Securities.

In fact, the title of this article comes from something that jumped out at me in a recent interview Bove did with Steve Forbes. Bove said:

I think the people in my industry and people in your industry are having a hard time getting their mind around the fact that something could go right in banking. In other words, the whole driving force, so to speak, among analysts is, "Find that thing that no one else found yet that is bad about banks. The credit card thing is bad; the commercial real estate thing is bad. You know, they've changed the accounting laws. But find that thing and drive these stocks lower."

Where does he get his crazy pills?
Positive on banking? Isn't that like saying you'd like to buy Bernie Madoff a beer?

Now it's notable that not everything Bove says about banks is lollipops and unicorns. In fact, he just recently reduced his 2009 estimates on both JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) and Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS), partly due to the fact that both will face costs associated with their TARP paybacks.

But looking longer term, he seems to like pretty much all the big boys in the sector, from the two above to the more-troubled Citigroup (NYSE: C) and Bank of America (NYSE: BAC).

And he may not be all that nuts. Psychologists have found a wide array of forces that can color people's thinking and cause them to incorrectly interpret situations. The availability heuristic, for example, has shown that people often predict probable outcomes based on how easily an example of the outcome can be brought to mind.

In the case of banks, analysts could be overestimating the potential for future bad outcomes in the industry simply because they can so easily call to mind the recent devastating losses.

Or the good old bandwagon effect could be at play. As the name suggests, this bias causes people to believe something simply because many other people believe the same thing.

As more and more analysts seem to settle on the conclusion that financial institutions from Capital One Financial (NYSE: COF) to Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) are in for more tough times, it becomes increasingly difficult for folks like Bove to jump out of step and suggest exactly the opposite.

These two biases could also be working in conjunction, with recent events coloring future expectations and the preponderance of analysts coming to that faulty conclusion, making it much easier for additional analysts to jump on the same off-kilter bandwagon. That is, of course, assuming that Bove isn't simply dead wrong.

Is there an antidote in the house?
If he's right, the most obvious course of action is for those who are still shorting the financial sector to step aside to avoid getting hit by an oncoming train. Bove has suggested that Citigroup could eventually head toward $12 per share, a quadrupling that would deliver more than a flesh wound to a short-seller unlucky enough to be on the receiving end.

For the rest of us, though, it means that it may be worth revisiting the murky world of U.S. banking. If Bove is correct, the banking sector may continue to struggle through this year, but then find itself on the winning end of rapidly expanding earnings once loss provisions start to settle back down. At that point, investors are likely to flock to the sector.

The banks we could expect to pay off the most are those that have been beaten down the most and carry the lowest valuations. Citigroup and Bank of America would certainly qualify, but JPMorgan, Fifth Third Bancorp (Nasdaq: FITB), and M&T Bank are also among the financial institutions trading below book value.

But don't take his word for it
Relying blindly on an analyst -- whether it's Bove or anyone else -- for your investment decisions is a recipe for disaster. While the analyst's initial call may be well publicized, subsequent changes or a complete reversal may not be, and that could leave you out in the cold. So if you like the sound of Bove's conclusions, use them as a jumping-off point for your own research into specific banks or the macrofactors of the financial industry.

And if you want to get a few more opinions on which stocks look interesting in the financial world, check out what the 135,000 members of the CAPS investing community have to say about the industry.

2009-06-29

3 Stock Picks: SLM, TPP, CNO

Sallie Mae Secures Contract -- and an Upgrade

Government-backed student loan provider Sallie Mae (SLM: 10.05, +0.78, +8.41%) received a passing grade from investors, who sent the shares 10% higher in early Monday trading, following a key analyst upgrade and the landing of a crucial government contract.

J.P. Morgan analyst Andrew Wesel gave Sallie Mae's stock an Overweight rating late last week, boosting it from Market Weight on the strength of its shifting business model. He said its transition to servicing loans � collecting payment and interest � and no longer originating loans would boost its earnings and growth.

"We are upgrading SLM on a long-term view that its transition to primarily a loan servicer, as opposed to a lender, will lower interest rate and funding risks, thus improving earnings visibility," he wrote.

The upgrade stemmed from a June 17 announcement that Sallie Mae was selected as one of four companies named by the Department of Education to service loans that it will start issuing in September. Sallie Mae will be joined by Nelnet (NNI: 13.61, +1.31, +10.65%), Great Lakes Education Loan Services and American Educational Services/ Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency. The quartet will also service Federal Direct Loan Program loans starting this autumn.

Sallie Mae said at the time it could handle more than $100 billion in new volume immediately.

"Winning the contract removes a major uncertainty and confirms our view that the company will be a player in the student lending business for the long term," wrote William Blair & Co. analyst David Long in a June 18 note. "While the company's business model continues to evolve and the new servicing economics are somewhat uncertain, recent developments have been quite positive."

Bottom Line: Buy
As the recent financial collapse shows, it's far better to be on the hook just for collecting loans, rather than making them and being burned by defaults. Recent graduates are likely to be more frugal and better payers than their overextended, house-payment defaulting, personal-bankruptcy-declaring predecessors.

Teppco Shares Propped by Merger Bid

Investors applauded oil exploration and production company Teppco Partners' (TPP: 30.12, +1.43, +4.98%) announcement that it agreed to be acquired by Enterprise Products Partners (EPD: 24.96, -0.33, -1.30%) in a $3.3 billion deal. Teppco's shares rose 5% in early Monday trading. Enterprise shares declined a bit more than 1% at the same time.

Should the deal go through, it would create the largest publicly traded master-limited partnership, a common tax-advantaged structure used by energy pipelines. The combined company would continue as a master-limited partnership, which offers investors the liquidity of a stock with the tax benefits of a limited partnership that returns much of its cash back to investors.

Although falling commodity prices have hit pipeline companies hard in the last several months, Teppco in April rejected a proposal to sell itself to Texas oil magnate Dan Duncan for a reported $2.8 billion.

Enterprise Chief Financial Officer Randy Fowler said on a Monday conference call that adding Teppco will diversify its business into pipelines and storage.

"The combined partnership provides a larger footprint and broader business and geographic diversification with additional avenues to generate incremental cash flow through greater utilization of assets, organic growth opportunities, cost savings and system optimization," he said. "The larger scale translates into more sources of cash flow, one of the credit positives, and greater trading liquidity in our debt and equity securities, which is important to investors."

Oppenheimer & Co. analyst John Cusick wrote earlier this month that broad commodity price fluctuations and a still grim macroeconomic backdrop could keep master-limited partnerships volatile in 2009. Recent rises in crude oil prices, followed by last week's fall below $70 a barrel, are reflected in the stock price fluctuations in both companies.

"Over the near-term we would be a bit cautious in adding significantly to any established positions, but would be buying on any pullbacks or dips," Cusick wrote June 1. "However, long term, we continue to view MLPs as an essential holding for investors with long time horizons and a focus on yield. The capital appreciation is icing on the cake."

Bottom Line: Hold
Mergers often have periods of uncertainty and it's worth waiting for a dip or a rival bid to shift Teppco's prices, rather than buying at the peak of the merger news boost.

Capital Troubles Plague Conseco

In a move to shore up capital, Conseco (CNO: 2.24, -0.16, -6.66%), an insurer that targets the senior market, effectively sold off part of its business, sending shares down more than 6% in early Monday trading.

The company, based in Carmel, Ind., said it would coinsure about 104,000 policies with Wilton Reassurance, in a $57.5 million deal.

"Completing this step is expected to increase Conseco's consolidated risk-based capital ratio by eight percentage points, along with increasing statutory capital," said Conseco CEO Jim Prieur in a prepared statement. "In addition, this transaction will further simplify our administrative operations as we focus on our core insurance businesses."

Alan Rambaldini, a Morningstar analyst, said Conseco has pared other parts of its non-core policy businesses over the last year to boost its capital position.

"They had policies they had acquired a number of years ago, and in exchange for some cash they're taking those polices and giving them to another company, along with assets set aside as reserves for those policies," says Rambaldini.

While the company serves the growing senior market, it's been scrambling to restructure its debts, and its market niche isn't enough to give it a competitive advantage against larger insurers, the analyst says.

Bottom Line: Sell
Another piecemeal deal that can't extricate Conseco from its fundamental troubles may convince investors it's time to cut their losses as the recent three-month rally flags.

6 Stocks to Sell Before Everyone Else Does

June may be the beginning of the summer slowdown for many people. But if you want to take advantage of index funds and other big institutional investors, June brings you an early Christmas present: advance warning of massive sales of unwanted stocks.

Ever year, Russell Investments makes changes to its benchmark indexes, adding some new stocks and taking out ones that no longer make the grade. The indexing giant is probably best known for its small-cap Russell 2000 index, but according to Forbes, institutional investors have $4.2 trillion in assets that are benchmarked to various Russell indexes, with the bulk tied to the large-cap Russell 1000 index.

Falling from glory
Although the process won't be complete until Friday, Russell has already announced some of its prospective additions and deletions from its indexes. As it happens, many well-known companies will have to say goodbye to Russell's broadest measure of the U.S. stock market, the Russell 3000. Many of the deletions are based on market cap, but bigger companies get the boot if their share prices fall below $1 or move to foreign countries. Here are a few of them:

Stock

Market Cap

1-Year Return

Sirius XM (Nasdaq: SIRI)

$1.35 billion

(80.1%)

Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI)

$142.3 million

(70.6%)

Ingersoll-Rand (NYSE: IR)

$6.6 billion

(45.0%)

Capstone Turbine (Nasdaq: CPST)

$160.3 million

(79.6%)

Finisar (Nasdaq: FNSR)

$283.6 million

(55.3%)

Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM)

$707.0 million

(97.2%)

Sources: Russell Investments, Yahoo Finance.

Meanwhile, some up-and-coming stocks will find their way into the Russell indexes, such as Hemispherx Biopharma (AMEX: HEB).

What it means
The most important thing about major changes to indexes is that because so many institutional investors work hard to match index returns, changes result in a flurry of trading activity during the transition period. With most indexes, though, including the S&P 500 and the Dow Industrials, changes aren't made on a regular basis. Instead, substitutions are made more on an as-needed basis, which limits the opportunity for traders to take advantage of index funds and other index-tracking investors.

The Russell reconstitution, however, is remarkable because of its regularity. Many investors rush to buy shares of newly added companies in an attempt to beat the index funds to the punch. To try to reduce the impact of the changes, Russell lengthens its process to give institutional investors more time to make trades and realign their portfolios to match up with the new lists.

Can you profit from the changes?
Nevertheless, the predictability of the changes imposes a cost on those who follow the index's changes strictly. Past research has concluded that the forced behavior that index changes impose on the funds that follow them costs investors an average of 2 percentage points every year.

A more recent look at this year's stocks suggests that those conclusions continue to be true. According to a Goldman Sachs study, stocks expected to be added this year have outperformed the overall index by 3.4 percentage points between April 1 and May 4. Stocks to be removed, on the other hand, have underperformed by 6.5 percentage points over the same period.

Nevertheless, some index-trackers prefer not to deal with Russell's annual process. Although the iShares Russell 2000 (IWM) tracks Russell's small-cap index, the Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) chooses to follow a different index, the MSCI small-cap index. That helps the Vanguard fund avoid the June madness.

What to do
With so many hedge funds and sophisticated investors trying to take advantage of the short-term impact on stocks affected by the Russell reconstitution, you're unlikely to cash in with a swing trade. However, that doesn't mean you should ignore the process entirely.

If you own shares of companies that are slated to be removed from the index, then you might want to sell shares before the final reconstitution on June 26 in order to avoid the selling pressure resulting from the index changes. Alternatively, if you really think a stock has good long-term prospects, make sure you're prepared for a potential drop on that day -- and don't panic-sell after the fact.

Conversely, if any of the stocks on the prospective list of additions are attractive to you, you might want to buy sooner than later. If being included in the index pushes share prices higher, you'll be glad you didn't wait.

Why Bonds Beat Stocks

A stunning statistic was published recently by financial analyst Robert Arnott. Bonds have been outperforming stocks. That might not be surprising to you -- it's pretty obvious that last year, when the market got clobbered, bonds would outperform stocks.

But I'm not talking about last year. Or even the last decade. I'm talking about 40 years of underperformance. From February 1969 to February 2009, an investor in 20-year Treasuries (consistently rolling to the nearest 20-year bond and reinvesting income) slightly outperformed an S&P 500 investor.

So, after what happened last year, you might be asking yourself why you're bothering with stocks at all. Why risk the stock market's volatility when bonds can offer the same returns?

How statistics lie
This bond outperformance example nicely illustrates Benjamin Disraeli's remark that "there are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

It's not that the statistic is false, but that it's completely deceiving. If you look at the 40-year time period, you'll see that interest rates on 20-year Treasuries started at 6.32% in 1969, spiked to 13.72% in 1982, then steadily dropped until in February they averaged 3.83%.

So, this means that bondholders got the best of both worlds. They were receiving high yields for most of the period, and were able to reinvest their interest at similarly high yields. Then at the end of the period, bond prices were high -- higher than at any other point in the period, since bond prices are high when yields are low. So, on top of the high income during most of the period, bondholders had their investment valued at extremely high levels at the end of the 40-year period. Thus, this was an excellent endpoint for Treasuries, allowing holders to reap big capital gains on top of their income.

Not nifty enough
Stocks, on the other hand, are suffering from bad endpoints. In 1969, talk was of the Nifty Fifty, the 50 large-cap growth stocks, like PepsiCo (NYSE: PEP), IBM (NYSE: IBM), Disney (NYSE: DIS), and McDonald's (NYSE: MCD), that many investors thought they could buy and hold, regardless of valuation. By 1972, the Nifty Fifty was trading at a gigantic multiple of 42 times earnings.

What's more, the endpoint of the 40 years is after the biggest stock market crash in 80 years. It's an absolutely atrocious endpoint for comparing the performance of stocks.

So, we're cherry-picking a fantastic period for bonds and a horrendous period for stocks, and discovering that stocks barely underperform. (And it's worth noting that stocks returned 700%, or 5.3% annually during that study period.)

Even with this unusual 40-year period, since 1871, stocks have outperformed bonds by 3.2 percentage points annually. So, just by the long-term numbers, stocks are still a better investment than bonds. It does show, however, that adding bonds to your portfolio can smooth your returns. Even if bonds don't match stocks' long-term returns, they can beat stocks for years or even decades.

A lesson from Buffett
But there's a more important lesson here than the benefits of asset allocation. It's that over the long term, the price you pay for stocks really matters, much more than the particular obsession of the day. In the 1960s and 1970s, the Nifty Fifty seemed unstoppable, but because investors paid too much, returns were mediocre.

But, investors who avoided the overvalued businesses and focused on the cheap ones could do very well. Warren Buffett paid attention to buying assets cheaply. As a result, from 1969 until the end of 2008 -- roughly the same 40-year period -- Berkshire Hathaway compounded its book value at a 20.7% rate.

Of course, Buffett wasn't invested exclusively in stocks. Berkshire owns bonds as well. But, here, too, valuation is critical. Buffett wasn't buying Level 3's (Nasdaq: LVLT) bonds during the Internet bubble in the late 1990s, but waited until they became cheap in 2001.

What to do now
So, while the historical performance of stocks versus bonds is interesting, valuations are what should dictate your investment strategy. Buy whatever's attractively valued.

Right now, that means you should avoid Treasuries and buy stocks. After all, Treasuries are still trading close to all-time highs. Yields really don't have much further to fall, and if inflation takes off, Treasuries could plummet. So, not only is the statistic deceptive, there's a good chance you'll get bitten if you interpret it to mean that you should be buying bonds today.

The stock market, on the other hand, has already crashed, and now looks cheap. Pfizer (NYSE: PFE), which used to trade at 50 times earnings, is now at a 12.5 multiple. Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) was trading at a 30 multiple a decade ago. Now, it's at 12. Sure, the economy is in a real mess and some investors are jittery about President Obama's proposed solution to the health-care crisis. But these issues won't last forever, even if many stocks are priced that way.

The Foolish bottom line
So, while it's true that bonds did outperform over a 40-year span, if you look at the underlying causes, it actually supports the idea that today's undervalued stocks should outperform going forward. It's all a matter of buying at the right price. Our Inside Value team sees today as a great time to buy -- we've found many exceptionally cheap stocks. You can read about them with a free trial.

2009-06-28

Stryker's Stock Is En Route to Recovery

THE THIGH BONE'S connected to the hip bone, and the hip bone's connected to the backbone. The connections, however, wear out with age, which is bad news for baby boomers but big business for Stryker , a leading maker of hip, knee, spine and other joint replacements, and a likely beneficiary of a coming wave of surgeries in the U.S. and abroad.

The recession has knocked Stryker (SYK: 40.85, -0.31, -0.75%) out of joint, curbing its historic double-digit rate of sales and profit growth. Patients have delayed costly elective surgery, hurting the orthopedic-implant business, while hospitals have reined in spending on beds and stretchers, denting the company's Med Surg Equipment unit. As a result, investors have the opportunity to snap up shares for $40 apiece, nearly 50% below the stock's 2008 high of $75.

Stryker's business -- and its shares -- could rebound sharply in 2010, as the economy recovers and employment perks up. Analysts expect the Kalamazoo, Mich., company to earn $1.2 billion, or $2.96 a share, this year, up just 5% from last year's $2.83. But earnings could rise 12% next year, to $1.3 billion, or $3.31 a share, on sales of $7 billion.

Help could come from any increase in hospital spending, which is likely to be flat to up 5% in 2010, after falling more than 20% this year, according to some analysts. Also, foreign-currency exchange could turn from a headwind to a tailwind toward the end of '09 if the dollar stays weak. Overseas markets account for 35% of Stryker's sales, and the company is pushing to expand in Japan, Africa, the Middle East and other regions.

"As the economic situation stabilizes, a favorable exchange rate and increased health-care spending will be significant upside catalysts for Stryker's growth," says Ronnie Moas, president of Standpoint Research in New York. Moas thinks the stock could trade between 50 and 55 next year.

Founded in 1941 by Dr. Homer Stryker, an orthopedic surgeon, Stryker is the tenth-largest medical-device company in the U.S., and a prominent player in the $38 billion orthopedic-implant market, where it competes with Johnson & Johnson (JNJ: 56.60, +0.33, +0.58%), Zimmer Holdings (ZMH: 43.10, +0.18, +0.41%), Medtronic (MDT: 34.97, +0.25, +0.72%) and others. Last year the orthopedic-implants business contributed 59% of total sales of $6.7 billion, while the Med Surg unit chipped in 41%.

With $2.2 billion of cash and only $20 million of debt, Stryker has one of the strongest balance sheets in the health-care sector. It has generated return on equity of at least 19% for nine straight years, and produces more than $1 billion a year of cash flow. The company has used its cash to buy back stock and pay a dividend -- now 40 cents a share, for a yield of 1%. It also has made small acquisitions and is rolling out new products, including a titanium hip cup and a wireless HDTV operating-room monitor.

Worries that health-care reform will crimp profits are obscuring Stryker's long-term prospects, as are concerns the slowdown in domestic hospital spending could go global. "An [international] capital-equipment slowdown may be the next leg down for Stryker," says Needham analyst Ed Shenkan, who has a Hold rating on the shares.

Moreover, the company has received four "warning letters" from the Food and Drug Administration in the past two years that led in some cases to voluntary product recalls. The letters, the latest received in May, alleged, among other things, improper quality and compliance issues at company facilities, including the sale of products without marketing approval. Stryker also is fending off regulatory investigations into its promotion of a bone-growth protein, and the sale of medical devices overseas.

The company is in the early stages of a three-year plan to spend $200 million to upgrade its quality controls and compliance system. At an analyst meeting in May, Chief Executive Stephen MacMillan, a J&J veteran, said management is making "tremendous progress" in improving quality, but conceded "regulatory overhang in the next 12 months" is the biggest risk facing the company. Stryker officials weren't available to comment.

Stryker's stock could fall to 35 or so in coming quarters if the market loses steam. But investors' concerns largely are baked into the price. Morningstar analyst Julie Stralow says a $40 stock assumes that sales increase only 4%, compounded, through 2013, and that operating margins fall to 18% from 23% now. "The current share price reflects a dire scenario" that is unlikely, says Stralow, who pegs fair value at $72 a share.

Stryker sells for 12 times 2010 estimates, slightly above peers. Back out its $5-plus per share in net cash, and the price/earnings ratio falls to 10. For a company with Stryker's healthy prospects, it doesn't get more out of joint than that.

The Bottom Line
Stryker's stock has fallen 47%, to $40, from its peak. It could rise to the mid-$50s as health-care spending rebounds. Morningstar pegs fair value at $72.

THE THIGH BONE'S connected to the hip bone, and the hip bone's connected to the backbone. The connections, however, wear out with age, which is bad news for baby boomers but big business for Stryker , a leading maker of hip, knee, spine and other joint replacements, and a likely beneficiary of a coming wave of surgeries in the U.S. and abroad.

The recession has knocked Stryker (SYK: 40.85, -0.31, -0.75%) out of joint, curbing its historic double-digit rate of sales and profit growth. Patients have delayed costly elective surgery, hurting the orthopedic-implant business, while hospitals have reined in spending on beds and stretchers, denting the company's Med Surg Equipment unit. As a result, investors have the opportunity to snap up shares for $40 apiece, nearly 50% below the stock's 2008 high of $75.

Stryker's business -- and its shares -- could rebound sharply in 2010, as the economy recovers and employment perks up. Analysts expect the Kalamazoo, Mich., company to earn $1.2 billion, or $2.96 a share, this year, up just 5% from last year's $2.83. But earnings could rise 12% next year, to $1.3 billion, or $3.31 a share, on sales of $7 billion.

Help could come from any increase in hospital spending, which is likely to be flat to up 5% in 2010, after falling more than 20% this year, according to some analysts. Also, foreign-currency exchange could turn from a headwind to a tailwind toward the end of '09 if the dollar stays weak. Overseas markets account for 35% of Stryker's sales, and the company is pushing to expand in Japan, Africa, the Middle East and other regions.

"As the economic situation stabilizes, a favorable exchange rate and increased health-care spending will be significant upside catalysts for Stryker's growth," says Ronnie Moas, president of Standpoint Research in New York. Moas thinks the stock could trade between 50 and 55 next year.

Founded in 1941 by Dr. Homer Stryker, an orthopedic surgeon, Stryker is the tenth-largest medical-device company in the U.S., and a prominent player in the $38 billion orthopedic-implant market, where it competes with Johnson & Johnson (JNJ: 56.60, +0.33, +0.58%), Zimmer Holdings (ZMH: 43.10, +0.18, +0.41%), Medtronic (MDT: 34.97, +0.25, +0.72%) and others. Last year the orthopedic-implants business contributed 59% of total sales of $6.7 billion, while the Med Surg unit chipped in 41%.

With $2.2 billion of cash and only $20 million of debt, Stryker has one of the strongest balance sheets in the health-care sector. It has generated return on equity of at least 19% for nine straight years, and produces more than $1 billion a year of cash flow. The company has used its cash to buy back stock and pay a dividend -- now 40 cents a share, for a yield of 1%. It also has made small acquisitions and is rolling out new products, including a titanium hip cup and a wireless HDTV operating-room monitor.

Worries that health-care reform will crimp profits are obscuring Stryker's long-term prospects, as are concerns the slowdown in domestic hospital spending could go global. "An [international] capital-equipment slowdown may be the next leg down for Stryker," says Needham analyst Ed Shenkan, who has a Hold rating on the shares.

Moreover, the company has received four "warning letters" from the Food and Drug Administration in the past two years that led in some cases to voluntary product recalls. The letters, the latest received in May, alleged, among other things, improper quality and compliance issues at company facilities, including the sale of products without marketing approval. Stryker also is fending off regulatory investigations into its promotion of a bone-growth protein, and the sale of medical devices overseas.

The company is in the early stages of a three-year plan to spend $200 million to upgrade its quality controls and compliance system. At an analyst meeting in May, Chief Executive Stephen MacMillan, a J&J veteran, said management is making "tremendous progress" in improving quality, but conceded "regulatory overhang in the next 12 months" is the biggest risk facing the company. Stryker officials weren't available to comment.

Stryker's stock could fall to 35 or so in coming quarters if the market loses steam. But investors' concerns largely are baked into the price. Morningstar analyst Julie Stralow says a $40 stock assumes that sales increase only 4%, compounded, through 2013, and that operating margins fall to 18% from 23% now. "The current share price reflects a dire scenario" that is unlikely, says Stralow, who pegs fair value at $72 a share.

Stryker sells for 12 times 2010 estimates, slightly above peers. Back out its $5-plus per share in net cash, and the price/earnings ratio falls to 10. For a company with Stryker's healthy prospects, it doesn't get more out of joint than that.

The Bottom Line
Stryker's stock has fallen 47%, to $40, from its peak. It could rise to the mid-$50s as health-care spending rebounds. Morningstar pegs fair value at $72.

Line Blurs Between Growth, Value Stocks

The debate over which style of stock-picking is superior -- value or growth -- has been vigorously contested in the investing world for years. There are numerous studies that show value stocks tend to outperform growth ones over the long haul. But there are also periods when growth offerings have had their time in the spotlight.

Investors who make a choice of one over the other are usually trying to gauge which style the market will favor. They gradually ratchet up one while cutting back on the other until the market changes course. Then, the opposite happens. Making a prediction on the direction of the stock market is never a simple task. Just ask all those investors who got burned when supposedly growthy Internet stocks fell off a cliff at the end of the last decade.

This year, in particular, it's been extremely difficult to judge which style of stocks is the better bet -- and, by proxy, which are the better mutual funds and ETFs to own. As the credit crisis has taken hold of the market, thousands of stocks and funds have been beaten down to tantalizingly low levels. In the process the distinction between growth and value has become one without any real difference. According to Lipper, the Russell 1000 Growth and Value indexes traded at 43.6 and 23.2 price/earnings ratios in early 2002. That gap has since shrunk to 13 and 11.9 multiples. That situation begs the question: Should investors really be worrying about which side of the investing fence they are sitting on?

"I have tilted portfolios one way or the other in the past," says J.D. Steinhilber, founder of AgileInvesting in Nashville. "But I am not doing so currently. In a market environment like this where everything has fallen so much I would be hesitant to say certain sectors are likely to recover before others."

We have always stuck to elementary definitions when it comes to describing the differences between value and growth stocks. On the one hand, value stocks usually have a low price/earnings ratio and a share price that's trading at a deep discount to its normal range or a specific target estimate. Growth stocks, though, usually change hands at pricey multiples and at rich prices because investors bet they will grow faster than the rest of the market.

The problem in 2008, though, is that the two groups aren't sticking to the script. A perfect example of this is technology, an industry that's a traditional bellwether for growth investing. According to Morningstar, Hewlett-Packard (HPQ: 37.61, -0.51, -1.33%) is trading at a slight discount to the S&P 500 despite a relatively healthy growth outlook for the printer and PC maker. Microsoft (MSFT: 23.35, -0.44, -1.84%) has become a top holding in the well-regarded T. Rowe Price Value fund (TRVLX). Meanwhile, American Century Growth (TWCGX) has a decent helping of energy stocks in its portfolio (at least at its last filing date). Value investors can argue that sector has traditionally been one of their favorites, long before it took off the last few years. A similar situation is playing out in financials, where dozens of growth and value managers alike are buying the same stocks in anticipation of a rebound.

What's more, the stock market hasn't discriminated this year. It's whacked all kinds of stocks and funds, regardless of what style or company size they may be labeled with. It's hard to argue in favor of growth or value when both are down more than 40% this year. Investors are losing money either way.

But what about 2009 or 2010? One of the attributes you will hear about growth sectors like tech or health care is that they tend to do well during slow-growth periods. That's because investors seek out stocks whose earnings are (potentially) growing at a faster pace than their contemporaries. In the ensuing buying frenzy the share prices increase. Again, we aren't so sure that scenario will play out this time around. The U.S. is dealing with a financial system in tatters, a battered housing industry, a new presidential administration, two wars and the tailspin of its automobile industry. In that kind of an environment it's tough to predict which stocks come out unscathed.

Advisors, though, say the best protection is to keep your portfolio simple, don't make any knee-jerk reactions or Hail Marys on risky stocks and, most important, stay diversified. If you're investing using ETFs, make sure you do homework on the construction of the underlying indexes.

"The traditional distinctions blur when you get into these different indexes because it all depends on the methodology," says Steinhilber, who uses ETFs extensively at his investment shop. "Everything has been destroyed to a certain degree. [It's best for investors] to clean up their portfolios, keep expenses low and look for opportunities."

Two of the gold standards for growth and value investing are the individual sleeves of the Russell 1000. The iShares Russell 1000 Growth (IWF: 41.15, +0.04, +0.09%) and the iShares Russell 1000 Value (IWD: 47.25, -0.17, -0.35%) are the ETFs based on those slices. Together, the funds hold almost $20 billion in assets.

A new option we're keeping our eye on comes from WisdomTree. This ETF provider recently filed with the SEC to launch WisdomTree LargeCap Growth (potential ticker: ROI). WisdomTree is known for its indexes based on dividends. This fund, though, will take a little bit of a different tact. Instead of solely focusing on those payments, it will eventually own about 300 companies based on a mix of annual earnings per share growth, annual sales per share growth, annual book value per share growth and annual stock price growth. Companies will be weighted based on their earnings over the most recent four quarters. If successful, the fund could put a twist on the old growth vs. value debate.

Maybe the best way to stay above the fray, though, is to keep a toe in both camps. Indeed, to benefit from a growth or value rebound, all you need to do is be exposed to both styles. To help you make that decision, below we list details on two popular value ETFs and two popular growth ETFs, their costs, their holdings and their returns year to date.