Category: Security Analysis

Homebuilder stocks – what’s next? $LEN $TOL $DHI $NVR $TMHC $MHO $HOV

Given the market selloff, I’ve seen a lot of doom and gloom articles on buyers’ appetites for homebuilding. Will buyers still show up to buy a home with COVID-19 going around? What will the impact on interest rates have??

Check out these headlines:

All these headlines essentially result in one thing… Agh! Panic!

Panic

Since most people hold a majority of their net worth in a home, these headlines draw eyeballs.

But let’s think about this for a moment. Yes, the coronavirus may impact my willingness to go out to eat. To ride the subway. To cheer on my favorite team at a sports bar (looking at you March Madness).

But is it going to cause me to stop buying a house? Especially when credit is readily available and interest rates just hit all time lows for a mortgage?

I personally have trouble seeing it. And so far, we aren’t in quarantine and the data has been supportive:

  • Today it was announced that mortgage applications to purchase a home are up 5.6% Y/Y
  • Redfin today noted, “Demand is still growing at surprisingly healthy levels. And growth in the number of people submitting offers is much higher.”
  • Even at ground zero for coronavirus in the US, Seattle, they noted, “Now coronavirus fears have spread from Seattle to other parts of the country, but we haven’t seen a big impact on home-buying demand yet.”
  • Hovnian, a national builder and also the latest to report earnings had a lot of positive things on its results call:
    • Talking about reported results: “Some may say that the strong increase was against an easy comparison last year. I’m pleased to say we were also up 33% compared to the first quarter of 2018. Additionally, our sales pace was the highest level of contracts per community for any first quarter since 2005. It’s clear that the housing market is rebounding and demand for our homes continues to gain momentum.”
    • Regarding the virus impact specifically:  “Sales feel particularly and perhaps surprisingly steady and solid”

It makes sense. The 30 year mortgage rate has made it super compelling to buy a home:
30 Year Mortgage Rate Chart

30 Year Mortgage Rate data by YCharts

At the very least, those that own a home can refinance and keep some more cash in their pocket each month.

At the same time, we’ve been underbuilding in this country since the downturn. While we overbuilt in the last downturn, we’ve been growing as a country (creating new households) but new starts haven’t kept up. We’re just now getting to mid-cycle levels.

I personally am looking at the homebuilder equities. Toll brothers and Lennar are trading just above 1.1x BV. These are companies that have cleaned up their balance sheets and are generating ~13% ROEs. That seems cheap to me. Toll has also been buying back stock like its nobody’s business. This could even be a shot to buy NVR, a great blue-chip.

Could we see a pause? Sure. But I think the longer-term fundamentals are strong and that this virus won’t impact their intrinsic value.

Is it time to buy cruise lines? Intrinsic value impact following short-term demand shocks $CCL $RCL $NCLH

People are saying that no one will ever take a cruise again. It’s over. Done. Pack those cruise ships up and send them home… But do people actually not remember the PR disaster Carnival dealt with in 2013? Here’s a great headline from that time:  “Stranded cruise ship on which ‘sewage ran down the walls’ and ‘savages’ fought over food finally docks amid jubilant scenes“. This came not too long after Costa Concordia wrecked and the Captain jumped ship (literally). 32 people died. I bet you can imagine what happened to Carnival’s sales in 2013 then?
Oh, that’s right – they were up. In 2014 they were up… they’ve basically been on an uninterrupted pace for a long time. In fact, many of these cruise lines have been public for so long that you can see how they performed after SARS, 9/11, 2008, Zika, Ebola – they pretty much kept on humming. Apparently nothing will stop college kids and boomers from taking a cruise.
I’m not saying you should buy them today, but they’ve historically traded at 10-13x EBITDA and are now trading at 5x. The market is currently pricing in death. I can confidently say that because they now are trading below the book value of cruise ships as well.
Now, cruise companies do have ship deliveries, which is something to monitor. This could crimp liquidity as they also take a demand hit in the next year.  But they also likely have tools to pushback on shipbuilders during times of stress. These are the shipbuilders main customers, so not like they want their customers to go into bankruptcy either.
However, some names like Roayl Carribean are investment grade and “December 31, 2019, we had liquidity of $1.5 billion, consisting of $243.7 million in cash and cash equivalents and $1.3 billion available under our unsecured credit facilities, net of our outstanding commercial paper notes”. Norwegian just announced at $675MM revolver with JPM priced at L+80bps.
I think the liquidity situation is fine to support a year of weakness, though admittedly, I’m not sure they could survive a whole year of lost revenue. Plus, the ships must be very expensive to dock and that is an ongoing fixed cost….
Lets just try to understand if this virus or 1 year impact should have that much of an impact on cruises (people will fight me on this, but I don’t think cruises are dead… people will still take cruises) but this is relevant for all businesses right now.
Here is a company that is expected to earn $10 in EPS in year 1 and grow ~2% a year. I discount these earnings, and the terminal value, back at 10% to arrive at ~$120 in value, which foots to a 12x P/E. P/E is just short hand for a DCF and that is what I am trying to show here so you can think about if a multiple compression actually makes sense.

*Note: terminal value is the value of a the future cash flows of a business beyond the forecast period, assuming a constant growth rate, in this case 2%.

Now lets say year 1 earnings are toast – they get cut in half. But year 2+ are the same because demand comes back. As you can see below, this had a ~4% impact on the intrinsic value of the business… not 50%! People may say, “well investors only look at earnings over the next year or two, so applying a 12x multiple to $5 in EPS is why the stock gets crushed.” Thanks – I realize that, but the math says that is wrong and an opportunity to make money.
Buying cruise lines is risky right now and up to you. Sorry for the headline, but hopefully you use this as a tool to find other companies who have not had their intrinsic value meaningfully impacted.

When buybacks fail… a quick look at IBM’s performance $IBM

I typically look for underappreciated, high FCF businesses that are shareholder friendly. As I was screening for new ideas, an old giant popped up – IBM. This is a personal opinion, but with so much focus on Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft and Apple it seems as though no one even discusses IBM anymore. Could this be a Microsoft-in-2011 moment? At that time, MSFT was trading at a P/E of 9-10x and was viewed as a slow, lagging behemoth, and certainly not exciting anymore… just a dividend paying stock. They got a new CEO after many years of Balmer and reignited excitement and ingenuity at the company. The rest is history.

IBM currently trades with a 4.8% dividend yield, 9.5x 2020e EBITDA and 10.1x 2020e EPS. The business looks like it hasn’t grown much at all in the past, but does have some exciting segments like Watson (“Cognitive Solutions”) which is wildly profitable – in 2018, Cognitive Solutions had nearly 68% gross profit margins and 38% EBITDA margins…

Should we compare Microsoft then to IBM? Clearly over the same time frame as Microsoft, IBM has been floundering.

Cognitive Solutions is clearly an exciting segment, but at the end of 2014 the company did $93BN in revenue and $24.6BN in EBITDA. In the past 12 month, the company did $77BN in revenue and $16.6BN in EBITDA. Moreover, if we go back to the end of 2003, the company’s market cap was $161BN. When they reported Q3’19 results, IBM’s market cap was $120BN. Meaning after nearly 16 years, no real value had been created.

So what happened? What were the drivers of these abysmal returns?

Clearly, a significant driver is the changing technology landscape. Over this time period, IBMs standing as a leader in tech has been eroded by competition. Over this time period, net income is up only $1.2BN, from $6.5BN to $7.7BN, which is a 1% CAGR.

With its changing position, investors no longer valued the company as an exciting leader. At the end of 2003, IBM was trading at 24.5x LTM earnings. By the end of Q3’19, it is trading at 15.5x LTM earnings. That de-rating of 10x had a significant impact on its stock performance.

Secondly, I think the company made some really poor investments. What investments you ask? Buying its own stock in large amounts. Admittedly without these buybacks, the price performance of IBM would have been abysmal.

I pulled the company’s cash flow statement over these ~16 years and analyzed what it did with cash. While we have hindsight bias, the company deployed too much into its own stock instead of trying to strengthen its position in a changing climate. You could even argue that they should have done more acquisitions. Excluding the recent RedHat acquisition, which was $33BN, the company did not actually spend that much on acquisitions over this time frame.

Outside of acquisitions, you could even argue that they should have just distributed cash to shareholders with special dividends. Again in hindsight, that would have allowed investors to purchase other businesses that are allocating capital for growth.

Let me be clear, I am a huge fan of buybacks and not trying to beat the drum that politicians like to use (buybacks aren’t an efficient use of resources and stifle growth etc.). One of my favorite companies is LyondellBasel (ticker LYB). While it is a cyclical, commodity chemical company operating near peak, they’re capital allocation decisions make sense. First, invest in their equipment for safety. Second, ensure that they are well prepared in an evolving landscape. Third, return cash to shareholders while managing a prudent balance sheet. They have bought back 10% of their outstanding shares each year for the past few years.

In this case, it seems like IBM bought back shares just to buyback shares. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see an activist approach IBM. Following Elliot’s success with AT&T, it seems like an activist could approach IBM regarding a spin-off or sale of its Cognitive Solutions business. I think a split of “old business” and “new business” similar to what happened at HP could be very interesting.

 

 

Stepping to the Sidelines on CorePoint ahead of Earnings $CPLG

While I typically view myself as a long-term investor, I also try to read the tea leaves and understand how a company’s fundamentals are shaping up. That way, I won’t be totally surprised when the company reports earnings. Sometimes, it makes sense to take signals appropriately and reduce a position you think is shaping up for failure.

This is a tough decision to make, but I think it makes sense to reduce CorePoint ahead of earnings. I say that based on the following:

  • Booking Issue Lingered: We know the booking “disruption” from Q2 has lingered in Q3. This literally means they are losing customers because they can’t book on the site. They said it on the call.
    • On July 30, 2019, we gave notice to LQ Management that we believe there are several events of default under the management agreements relating to all of our wholly owned properties” – so they waited until one month into the quarter to serve a default notice…
    • “On our first quarter call, we noted we were seeing early indications of disruption, in particular, a decline in ADR from the transition and integration of our hotels to the Wyndham platform in April. Unfortunately, that has not yet abated, and July’s RevPAR on a comparable basis was down 5.2% with continued market share loss.” – so we know in July RevPar was down ~5% compared to -6% for Q2.
    • While this should be temporary, I think they clearly tried to signal that the impacts would linger.
  • Oil price and rig count is down: We know that CPLG has heavy exposure to Texas and the oil producing regions, which is why some look at oil as a proxy. As shown below, this does not bode well for improving results or an increase in guidance compared to Q2’19.
  • Hurricane Imelda: There is a chance that Hurricane Imelda had a significant impact on results. While not discussed as much as Hurricane Florence and Irene, Imelda caused significant flooding in Texas. We already saw what Hurricane damage did to CPLG before, so I am thinking it likely pressured results in some way (e.g. took some rooms of the table).
  • CPLG’s price has recovered: CPLG’s stock was at $10.9 before it reported its last atrocious quarter and now is at $9.7. While I think it is technically cheap, I also think the stock price will follow fundamentals. I think the chances are higher that I’ll be able to nab at a better price post-quarter.

How could I be wrong? Well, I am essentially trying to trade CPLG around earnings, which is usually a losers game. The company also could have resolved the booking issue much faster and that will improve their outlook. Lastly and more importantly, I think the story continues to be around the asset sales. With the stock at such a low p/BV, selling assets above book is very accretive. This is where I am the most concerned on reducing.

Unfortunately, I think this means guidance will have to be reduced from $155MM at mid-point. The company previously guided RevPar to be flat to up 2%, then revised it to down between 2.5% and 4.5%. That new guidance, while abysmal, banks on a recovery in the 2H that I just do not see happening.

Is management stepping in to buy stock? This could be a good signal of how the quarter was shaping up, how they view the prospects of the company, how fundamentals are moving etc.

Sadly, no. Only a director bought right after Q2 ($4,400 ain’t much) and I don’t see any other members of management stepping up.

Why I Think Okta Stock is Overvalued $OKTA

My firm recently began using Okta for security log-in purposes. In line with what Peter Lynch would recommend, when you hear about adoption of a product, go and check out their stock. Often times, Lynch would hear his children talking about a new toy, he’d buy the stock and profit as the rest of Wall Street caught up to the story.

While Okta is not a toy company, it is a hot topic for today’s investors. In my experience, I’ve seen Okta used as a security portal for employees in order to access the cloud where important files or information may be held. A benefit is that its simple to use and its multi-factor login creates a secure authentication process without multiple log-ins.  For its customer platform, you and I may be logging in to JetBlue’s website and everything looks right, but behind the scenes Okta is powering the customer experience and making it secure.

The bull case for Okta is that as Cloud adoption grows, so will security needs. We’ve all seen and heard about data breaches in the past, so it will clearly be a big focus in the future.

Peruse any one of Okta’s filings and it is clear they are bullish on the cloud and what it means for them. In fact, Cloud is mentioned 285 times in their S-1 and they note, “According to International Data Corporation, or IDC, in 2016, the Cloud Software market is expected to be $78.4 billion and the Custom Application Development market is expected to be $41.2 billion. We believe that our platform is well positioned to address a meaningful portion of these markets.”

Notice they don’t say that is their addressable market. The fact is, it is likely a fraction of that, but undoubtedly it will be big. This growth has started to show in Okta’s numbers. In the FY ended Jan-2016, Okta did just $86MM in sales and in the LTM period Jul-19, they did $487MM. That is a 64% CAGR!

As expected, Okta’s growth has started to slow. It is simply impossible to sustain that rate forever. Analysts expect however that it will grow top line ~30% through 2021.

Getting to the valuation:

Let’s just say we think Okta can grow at a 30% CAGR for the next 7 years. Their GP margins, given it is a subscription model mostly, grow at high incremental rates. I will assume 88%. Given security is a constantly evolving business, I will assume that R&D is fixed as a % of sales, but roughly half of sales and marketing is fixed vs. variable (and grow at inflation) and G&A and back office are 75% fixed (likely an assumption, honestly).

What we see above is that if everything goes right and they grow at a massive rate, the company is still trading at 20x EBITDA 7 years from now…. I don’t see why I would buy this when Facebook is growing 20% a year and trades at just 10.5x 2020.

So what do you need to believe? I would have to say investors are banking on AT LEAST 40% top line CAGR with massive EBITDA growth (negative to $1.4BN) and that still only gets you to 10.7x EBITDA…. looking 7 years out. To me, this is crazy.

While Okta has some benefits of being “entrenched” in its customer base, I don’t think switching costs are that high. My firm used something before we moved to Okta… we could move again if we deem we are more protected or offered more for the same price. This is a constant occurrence in Tech and especially in cyber security… constant cannibalization and forming something new and better… often at the expense of incumbents.