Target Prices? Really?
For some investors, the temptation to build portfolios
by selecting stocks with the highest target prices, compared to current prices,
is up there with believing in the tooth fairy. Yet Investopedia, one of the more
competent websites, states the following:
“When it comes to evaluating stocks,
target prices can be even more useful than the ratings of equity analysts.
Strictly defined, a target price is an estimate of a stock's future price,
based on earnings forecasts and assumed valuation multiples.”
That may be accurate, though neither should be taken
seriously. Let’s consider the merit of
each.
Current prices for stocks are the products of the following
equation: earnings per share (i.e., company net income divided by the number of
common shares outstanding) times the price-earnings multiple, which is a numeric
valuation of the earnings per share (EPS).
If EPS are $2.00 and the stock sells for 40, the price-earnings multiple
is 20.
Target prices are forward-looking extrapolations. In other words, projected future EPS times an
assumed price-earnings multiple. If the EPS
for Company X may grow to $3.00 in five years and the price-earnings multiple remains
at 20, one might conclude that the price will rise to 60.
That’s interesting, but deeply flawed since it’s
largely a function of the annual rate of earnings growth. If the rate slows, the price-earnings multiple
may narrow. If it accelerates, the
multiple may expand. Either way, it’s
essential to be aware that stocks (and the overall stock market) rarely sell at
what might be considered normal valuations.
So target prices are nothing more than crap shoots.
If target prices are essentially meaningless, buy, hold
or sell recommendations are total nonsense.
It’s well known that the majority of recommendations are buys pushed by
Wall Street houses looking to move large blocks of stock or to satisfy the gullibility
of retail investors. Despite this preposterous proposition, there have never
been any studies demonstrating that these recommendations are of any value.
Indeed, during my extended tenure at a prestigious
investment advisory company, which published stock ratings based solely on quantitative
information, a short-term deviation in the ratings method that included the
subjective view of the company’s analysts was quickly scotched after it became
obvious that those views hurt, not helped, the ratings.
Although target prices and ratings may appear to be of merit, they’re running neck and neck with Casper the Friendly Ghost.
N. Russell Wayne, CFP
Any questions? Please contact me at nrwayne@soundasset.com
Comments
Post a Comment