Archive | Guru Investing

RSS feed for this section

Stocks the Smart Money Are Buying… and Selling

12682081033_1f351d28d1_z

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey

The following is an excerpt from 7 Stocks the Smart Money Loves… or Hates

It’s that time again. 45 days after the end of each quarter, large institutional money managers are required to disclose the stocks that they bought or sold during the quarter. While this is an annoying to the money managers (it’s a little like playing poker with your cards face up for the rest of the table to see), it’s great for the rest of us. We can peek over the shoulders of some of the greatest investors in history.

Now, I have to give the usual caveats. The 13-F reports provided to the SEC are a snapshot in time. There is no guarantee that the manager still owns the stock by the time we read the report. We also have no information about short positions or futures positions. So in reading the raw reports, we have no way of knowing if a manager is truly bullish on a particular stock or if that stock is simply a piece of larger hedge or pair trade.

But if you’re familiar with the trading styles of the managers you follow, you can generally have a pretty good idea of what their intentions are with a stock.

So with no more ado, here are five high-profile stocks the masters of the universe are buying… or selling.

I’ll start with iPhone maker Apple (APPL), which has become something of a punching bag for hedge fund titans. As Apple has struggled to grow in recent years, several big money investors have lost patience and moved on. Greenlight Capital’s David Einhorn sold 1.3 million shares last quarter, reducing his total by nearly 17%. Apple remains his largest single holding, however, at 12% of his portfolio.

Steve Cohen, Leon Cooperman and Jim Chanos also reduced their positions in Apple.

But interestingly, one very high-profile investor – Mr. Warren Buffett himself – made a large Apple purchase. Buffett raised his stake in Apple by more than 50%. Apple still remains a small position for Berkshire Hathaway at about 1% of the portfolio. But Buffett clearly likes what he sees, and his stake is growing.

I, for one, agree with Buffett here. Apple’s slow growth is mostly a result of impossible-to-top comps due to the unprecedented success of the iPhone 6. But as Apple’s sales cycle gets back to normal, you should see very steady growth in the years ahead. And as I wrote recently, yes, Apple’s cash hoard really is a sight to behold.

To read the rest of the article, please see: 7 Stocks the Smart Money Loves… or Hates

Disclosures: As of this writing, I am long AAPL.

Disclaimer: This material is provided for informational purposes only, as of the date hereof, and is subject to change without notice. This material may not be suitable for all investors and is not intended to be an offer, or the solicitation of any offer, to buy or sell any securities nor is it intended to be investment advice. You should speak to a financial advisor before attempting to implement any of the strategies discussed in this material. There is risk in any investment in traded securities, and all investment strategies discussed in this material have the possibility of loss. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The author of the material or a related party will often have an interest in the securities discussed. Please see Full Disclaimer for a full disclaimer.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

So, Bill Ackman Makes Some Good Points on the Index Bubble…

10159650595_aea8898457_oHe’s often controversial… and usually pretty brash. But Pershing Square’s Bill Ackman is also usually quite insightful. He’s been at this game a long time, and he’s had his share of big wins… and big losses. Ackman has an ego on him. (What hedge fund manager doesn’t?) But he’s also his own biggest critics, and like all good investors he learns from his mistakes.

Today, let’s take a look at Ackman’s latest letter to investors, which came out last week. Ackman, like a lot of hedgies, had a terrible 2015. Here were some of his takeaways:

Not All Valuation Metrics are Equal

Ackman bet big on Valeant Pharmaceuticals (VRX)… and lost big when the stock rolled over. Per Ackman,

Principally, we missed the opportunity to trim or sell outright certain positions that approached our estimate of intrinsic value. Our biggest valuation error was assigning too much value to the so-called “platform value” in certain of our holdings. We believe that “platform value” is real, but, as we have been painfully reminded, it is a much more ephemeral form of value than pharmaceutical products, operating businesses, real estate, or other assets as it depends on access to low-cost capital, uniquely talented members of management, and the pricing environment for transactions. [Emphasis Sizemore]

Charles here. I learned a similar lesson in 2015. Just as Ackman lost money in an acquisition-hungry pharma stock, I lost money in MLPs, small-cap REITs and business development companies — three sectors that would normally have very little in common. But the tie that bound them was their dependence on the capital markets for fresh funding. When the credit markets got skittish, Mr. Market relentlessly punished these sectors, and two of my holdings — Kinder Morgan (KMI) and Teekay (TK) were forced to slash their dividends.

Know Who You’re In Bed With

Due to Ackman’s high profile, he tends to attract copycats. I myself have been guilty of perusing his SEC disclosures. This creates risks of its own:

Perhaps the largest correlation in our portfolio is one that we have not previously considered; that is, the fact that we own large stakes in each of these companies. We have had the benefit of a “following” of investors who track and own many of our holdings. This has given us significantly greater clout than is reflected by our percentage ownership of these companies, and we believe that it is partially what has caused the “pop” in market price when we announce a new active investment. As a result, these active managers’ performance is often closely tied with ours. When Valeant’s stock price collapsed, our performance, and that of Pershing Square followers, were dramatically affected. Nearly all of these investment managers are subject to daily, monthly, and quarterly redemptions, and therefore, many were likely forced to liquidate substantial portions of their holdings which overlap with our own…

While it is impossible to know for sure, we believe that our continued negative outperformance in the first few weeks of the year relates primarily to forced selling of our holdings by investors whose stakes overlap with our own.

This raises a bigger issue of simply considering who the major holders of your stocks are and what their constraints or motivations might be. Returning to my own losses last year, The selloff in MLP shares was massively exacerbated by mutual funds, ETFs and — most importantly — leveraged closed-end funds and hedge funds that were forced to liquidate to meet redemptions or margin calls. This were holders that were forced to sell at whatever price the market gave them.

The Index Fund Bubble… And What It Means

Finally, Bill Ackman has some insightful comments about the “bubble” in indexing. Given the lousy performance of active managers over the past decade, it’s easy to see why investors continue to flock to index funds. They are cheaper in terms of fees, more tax efficient and have had better returns of late.

But here’s the problem. Indexing only works when their are a sufficient number of active managers to make the market at least semi-efficient. If everyone becomes a passive indexer, then the returns of the major indexes will start to lag in a major way as the stocks in the index become overowned and overpriced.

But there are other considerations too. Passive ownership essentially gives management a free pass and allows lousy management teams to stay entrenched.

As Ackman writes,

As index fund ownership grows as a percentage of shares outstanding, the voting power of index fund managers increases. While on the one hand, one might believe this is good for America as these “permanent” owners should think very long term compared with the many investors whose average holding period is less than one year.

On the other hand, there are significant drawbacks… While index fund managers are, of course, fiduciaries for their investors, the job of overseeing the governance of the tens of thousands of companies for which they are major shareholders is an incredibly burdensome and almost impossible job. Imagine having to read 20,000 proxy statements which arrive in February and March and having to vote them by May when you have not likely read the annual report, spent little time, if any, with the management or board members, and haven’t been schooled in the industries which comprise the index…

Of course, this is impossible. Index managers are passive and will generally toe the line for management. Ackman points out some very significant long-term effects of this, asking the proverbial question of what happens when index funds effectively control corporate America:

If the index fund trend continues, and it looks likely to do so, what happens when index funds control Corporate America? Courts have often deemed shareholders to be in control of a corporation with as little as 20% of the ownership of a company. At current rates of asset inflows, it will not be long before index funds effectively control Corporate America and the corporations of many foreign countries.

The Japanese system of cross corporate ownership, the keiretsu, has been blamed for decades of Japanese corporate underperformance and economic malaise. Large passive ownership of Corporate America by index funds risks a similar outcome without the counterbalancing force of large active investors…

The thought of corporate America turning Japanese should be enough to make even the biggest proponent of indexing pause for a moment.

Ackman says that the “greatest threat to index fund asset accumulation is deteriorating absolute returns and underperformance versus actively managed funds” because money flows into these funds with no consideration of value. I agree, and would add that this was the major rationale for the “smart beta” movement.

But perhaps the greatest takeaway here is simply to not give up on active management. When you invest outside of the mainstream, you will have returns that are outside of the mainstream. That means that there will be plenty of years when you underperform.

But if you’re a good investor, it also means that there will be years where you massive outperform. So keep your chin up. Even hedge fund masters of the universe lose money some years.

Charles Sizemore is the principal of Sizemore Capital, a wealth management firm in Dallas, Texas. As of this writing, he was long KMI and TK.

Photo credit: InsiderMonkey

 

Disclaimer: This material is provided for informational purposes only, as of the date hereof, and is subject to change without notice. This material may not be suitable for all investors and is not intended to be an offer, or the solicitation of any offer, to buy or sell any securities nor is it intended to be investment advice. You should speak to a financial advisor before attempting to implement any of the strategies discussed in this material. There is risk in any investment in traded securities, and all investment strategies discussed in this material have the possibility of loss. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The author of the material or a related party will often have an interest in the securities discussed. Please see Full Disclaimer for a full disclaimer.

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

What’s David Einhorn Up To?

Photo credit: InsiderMonkey

Photo credit: InsiderMonkey

Greenlight Capital’s David Einhorn made a splash this week by seeking a seat on the board of troubled solar company SunEdison (SUNE). SunEdison’s stock is down nearly 90% since July, though Greenlight has been adding to its position since the beginning of this year and now owns about 6% of the company.

While SunEdison is getting the headlines right now, I’m more interested in some of Einhorn’s other investments. Einhorn, like a lot of aggressive hedge fund managers, runs a concentrated long portfolio. So the movement of a single stock or two can have an outsized impact on his portfolio. And Einhorn — like a lot of value managers, myself included — has taken his lumps  over the past year.

At any rate, let’s take a look at what Mr. Einhorn has in his portfolio:

SymbolCompanyValue ($1,000)% of Portfolio% of Company
AAPLApple Inc1,238,36820.530.20
GMGeneral Motors Co489,2908.111.05
KORSMichael Kors Holdings Ltd297,5264.933.83
CBIChicago Bridge & Iron Co296,7144.927.13
CNXConsol Energy Inc290,1734.8112.93
AERAerCap Holdings NV280,8544.663.72
TWXTime Warner Inc262,2614.350.48
GRBKGreen Brick Partners Inc261,2044.3349.41
MUMicron Technology Inc185,3323.071.19
ACMAecom177,9742.954.27
ONON Semiconductor Corp162,6732.704.19
BKBank of New York Mellon Corp156,6002.600.37
VOYAVoya Financial Inc141,4872.351.69
SUNESunEdison Inc133,5862.215.87

With the exception of SUNE, which reflects recent buying, the rest of these holdings are as of September 30. We should get updated numbers for the fourth quarter in a little over two weeks. (I should also mention that these are his long positions only; Einhorn also runs a short book, though those positions are not disclosed.)

But as of the most recent numbers we have, two stocks really jump off the page: Apple (AAPL) and General Motors (GM), which make up 21% and 8% of his long portfolio, respectively. [Disclosure: I am long both as well.]

Apple is taking a beating today after it gave disappointing guidance for the next quarter. Well, let me just say that I would be very surprised to see Einhorn dump Apple on that news. Einhorn is patient enough to see beyond the next quarter, and Apple has been priced as a no-growth company for a long time. Apple is one of the cheapest large stocks in America with a price/earnings ratio in the mid single digits once you strip out its gargantuan cash hoard. Fellow activist investor Carl Icahn, who also holds about 21% of his portfolio in Apple, has said publicly that he estimates Apple’s value at well over $200 per share. We’ll see. But I can say this: Given the low expectations built into Apple’s stock price right now, it wouldn’t much in the way of good news to send the shares up sharply.

If Apple drifts lower, I’d recommend backing up the truck to buy more.

I’m also bullish on General Motors. China is looking wobbly and there are valid concerns that last year’s banner year for car sales isn’t sustainable. But again, like Apple, GM has been priced as a no-growth stock for a long time. And at today’s prices, you’re picking up a nice 5% dividend.

I don’t know when valuation will matter again. The past year has been a nightmare for value investors, and 2016 isn’t getting off to a good start either. But by owning cheap stocks throwing off a high and rising dividend, you’re at least getting paid to be patient.

Charles Sizemore is the principal of Sizemore Capital, a wealth management firm in Dallas, Texas. As of this writing, he was long AAPL and GM.

Disclaimer: This material is provided for informational purposes only, as of the date hereof, and is subject to change without notice. This material may not be suitable for all investors and is not intended to be an offer, or the solicitation of any offer, to buy or sell any securities nor is it intended to be investment advice. You should speak to a financial advisor before attempting to implement any of the strategies discussed in this material. There is risk in any investment in traded securities, and all investment strategies discussed in this material have the possibility of loss. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The author of the material or a related party will often have an interest in the securities discussed. Please see Full Disclaimer for a full disclaimer.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

What Are the Hedge Fund Masters of the Universe Buying?

11921438835_e97bc9091a

Investing is one of those rare disciplines in which it really doesn’t pay to be original. This is money, not literature, and they don’t award Pulitzer Prizes for original work.

You don’t want to mindlessly follow the herd, of course. That rarely ends well. Before you copy the trading moves of another investor, you need to do a little homework of your own, and you should always maintain an independent, skeptical mind when putting your capital at risk. But you don’t get bonus points for coming up with an original trade. Returns are returns, regardless of whose idea the trade was, so there is really no sense in reinventing the wheel.

Today, we’re going to take a look at some of the most recent major trades by some of the smartest investors in the business. Not all of these are trades I would recommend myself. In fact, at least one of them is a stock I would run away from screaming. But it’s worthwhile to track which stocks the masters of the universe are buying. Even if we don’t invest along with them on every trade, we might learn a thing or two.

Cheniere Energy 

I’ll start with liquefied natural gas exporter Cheniere Energy (LNG). With the price of crude oil under major pressure in 2015, energy stocks – Cheniere included – have taken an absolute beating. Cheniere is down over 40% from its 52-week high. Yet some of the smartest investors of our lifetimes are backing up the proverbial truck and loading it up with Cheniere.

Last quarter, Seth Klarman – a value investor that most other value investors consider to be an almost legendary god-like figure – increased his already massive position in Cheniere by nearly half. (See “Investing Legends: Baupost’s Seth Klarman”)

Klarman runs a highly-concentrated portfolio; so highly concentrated, in fact, that his top five stocks make up more than half the portfolio. Cheniere now makes up fully 18% of Klarman’s portfolio, and Klarman owns 22 million shares at an average cost basis of $63.57 per share.

So at today’s price of about $48 per share, you can get a much better deal than Klarman, a man universally recognized as one of the savviest value investors to ever play the game.

And Klarman isn’t the only legend aggressively buying Cheniere. Carl Icahn has been aggressively accumulating the shares and bought 27 million shares last quarter at an average price of $61.88 per share. And since the end of the quarter, he’s continued to average down, buying an additional 1.3 million in the mid-$40s. So today, you can buy Cheniere at a better price than Mr. Icahn as well.

What do these legends see in Cheniere, amidst the carnage in the energy market? They’re looking ahead. If you are a European or Asian energy importer, would you feel comfortable trusting your country’s gas supply to Vladimir Putin’s Russia or to the volatile Middle East? Me neither.

If you believer that American gas exports make sense, then Cheniere makes sense.

Mondelez International

Up next is snack food giant Mondelez International (MDLZ), the owner of the Nabisco, Cadbury and Oreo brands, among others.

As I wrote recently (see “Coke in the Crosshairs”) junk food today is somewhat reminiscent of cigarettes 30 years ago. Regulators and activists are using junk food companies as the scapegoat for everything from childhood obesity to adult-onset diabetes.

But just as Big Tobacco stocks have often been some of the best stocks to buy despite the onslaught of bad publicity against them, junk food stocks might also represent a good opportunity. Perhaps that is Pershing Square boss Bill Ackman’s rationale for making a major investment in Mondelez last quarter. Ackman bought 43 million shares, making Mondelez his fourth-largest holding at 13% of his long portfolio.

Like Seth Klarman, Bill Ackman tends to run a highly concentrated portfolio in which he bets big on a very small handful of stocks. When it works, it works fantastically well. Ackman’s hedge fund earned returns in excess of 40% last year.

Alas, running a concentrated portfolio is not without its risks. Ackman’s fund is down about 20% this year, due in large part to its overweighted position in Valeant Pharmaceuticals (VRX).

So, is Ackman’s bet on Mondelez likely to pan out?

Based on the prices he paid, I’d say chances are good. Mondelez trades for just 8 times trailing earnings.

Apple

Up next is one of my personal favorites, consumer electronics king Apple (AAPL). Carl Icahn is probably the highest-profile Apple bull out there. Icahn has about 20% of his portfolio allocated to Apple, and he’s been the loudest voice calling for Apple to return cash to shareholders via dividend hikes and aggressive share repurchases.

But Icahn now has company from fellow hedgie David Einhorn, who increased his already enormous position in Apple by more than half last quarter. Einhorn now owns 11 million shares, making Apple about 20% of his long portfolio.

Apple, as the largest company in the world by market cap, is naturally going to be widely held by large money managers. But putting 20% of your portfolio into a single stock is a bold statement. But given the general sense of bearishness towards Apple these days, is it the right statement?

Let’s take a look. It’s fair to say that Apple is no longer the growth dynamo it was five years ago. The smartphone market, at least in the developed world, is largely saturated. So at this point, most iPhone sales are replacements rather than new purchases. iPad sales have been disappointing for several quarters, and Apple’s newer products – such as the Apple Watch and Apple Pay – haven’t been blockbusters.

Guess what? At today’s prices, none of that actually matters. Apple is not being priced as a growth dynamo. In fact, at 12 times trailing earnings, it’s being priced as a no-growth company. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 trades for 21 times trailing earnings.

That’s absurd. In a broadly expensive market, it makes no sense that Apple trades at such a deep discount. I would follow Icahn and Einhorn here.

Alphabet 

Up next, we have Apple’s rival in the smartphone wars, Alphabet (formerly Google)(GOOGL).

2015 has been the year of the “FANGs,” in which a small handful of stocks – specifically Facebook (FB), Amazon (AMZN) Netflix (NFLX) and Google have been responsible for keeping the market averages afloat.

Perhaps this is what convinced Leon Cooperman to massively increase his stake in Alphabet last quarter. Cooperman bought 213,659 shares of Alphabet in the second quarter and then more than doubled his holdings with a 269,090-share purchase in the third.

Cooperman, who heads Omega Advisors, does not run as concentrated a portfolio as some of the other gurus I’ve covered today. But Alphabet is now his largest holding and makes up a very respectable 6% of his portfolio.

Alphabet is not particularly cheap, trading at 31 times trailing earnings. Also, and much to my chagrin, Alphabet does not pay a dividend, which I consider downright criminal for a company of Alphabet’s size.

Still, Alphabet has been one of the few bright spots this year in a market that has been mostly disappointing, particularly for value investors. If you’re a momentum investor, then by all means, buy Alphabet and ride it higher. Just be prepared to sell when the market gets fickle and turns its affections elsewhere.

International Business Machines

And finally, we get to International Business Machines (IBM), a long-time holding by Warren Buffett. Buffett added about 1.5 million shares to his IBM position last quarter, and it is now his fourth-largest holding.

Buffett is also losing his shirt on IBM. He owns 81 million shares at an average price of $172 per share. At time of writing, IBM trades for just $134.45.

Buffett’s ownership of Big Blue is old news. But he now has company in the trade. Last quarter, Bruce Berkowitz and Eddie Lampert each made new purchases of IBM. Berkowitz bought 754,000 shares, making IBM a modest 3% of his portfolio. Lampert bought 440,225 shares, making it about 4% of his portfolio.

I don’t claim to be smarter than Buffett, Berkowitz or Lampert. But I don’t intend to follow them into this trade either. IBM’s business appears to be falling apart. Revenues have been falling for three straight years with no end in sight, and IBM has been slow to compete with more flexible cloud rivals Amazon, Alphabet and Microsoft (MSFT).

So, what do these storied value investors see in IBM? To be fair, it is a cheap stock at current prices, trading for just 9 times trailing earnings. But remember, those earnings are inflated by IBM’s aggressive share repurchases, and cheap stocks can stay cheap forever in the absence of a catalyst to send them higher.

Frankly, I see no catalyst for IBM right now. After the tumble the stock has taken, a dead-cat bounce is a real possibility. But if I’m going to make a long-term bet in this space, I’d put my money on Microsoft instead.

Disclosures: Long AAPL, MSFT.

Charles Lewis Sizemore, CFA, is chief investment officer of the investment firm Sizemore Capital Management and the author of the Sizemore Insights blog.

Disclaimer: This material is provided for informational purposes only, as of the date hereof, and is subject to change without notice. This material may not be suitable for all investors and is not intended to be an offer, or the solicitation of any offer, to buy or sell any securities nor is it intended to be investment advice. You should speak to a financial advisor before attempting to implement any of the strategies discussed in this material. There is risk in any investment in traded securities, and all investment strategies discussed in this material have the possibility of loss. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The author of the material or a related party will often have an interest in the securities discussed. Please see Full Disclaimer for a full disclaimer.

Read full story · Comments { 2 }

Revisiting Icahn’s Apple Call After the Correction

9443219007_e12e30e974_z

Activist investor Carl Icahn has known to… ahem… talk his book. He’s been known to talk it quite loudly in fact. If “scream your book” was an expression, that would be an accurate description of what Carl Icahn does.

So, we should probably take Mr. Icahn’s public love affair with Apple (AAPL) with a large grain of salt. Apple stock is, after all, his largest non-controlled holding, representing more than 21% of his portfolio.

Apple stock is down nearly 20% from its 52-week high, and at one point during last week’s market pandemonium it was down over 30% from its 52-week high. So, with AAPL pretty roughed up in recent weeks and trading near $110 per share, I wanted to revisit some of the claims made by Carl Icahn back in May.

Icahn said that Apple is worth over $240 per share. But a lot has changed in the past four months. China’s market bubble turned into a major bust, and the U.S. market entered official correction territory. But if Icahn is accurate, then investors buying Apple stock today should be looking at returns of nearly 120% in short order.

In his letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook, Icahn wrote.

To arrive at the value of $240 per share, we forecast FY2016 EPS of $12.00 (excluding net interest income), apply a P/E multiple of 18x, and then add $24.44 of net cash per share. Considering our forecast for 30% EPS growth in FY 2017 and our belief Apple will soon enter two new markets (Television and the Automobile) with a combined addressable market size of $2.2 trillion, we think a multiple of 18x is a very conservative premium to that of the overall market.

Valuation is Absurdly Cheap

Let’s pick these numbers apart. Earnings forecasting site Estimize, which has an outstanding track record at forecasting company earnings, pegs AAPL’s 2016 earnings per share lower, at $9.54. So Icahn might be a little aggressive in his estimates. But still, even at the lower Estimize estimate, Apple stock trades for a very modest forward P/E of 11.5.

And we haven’t made any adjustments for the cash hoard. If you strip out the approximately $35 dollars per share in cash, you get a forward P/E of 7.9. To put that in perspective, the forward P/E on the S&P 500 is 17.5.

Now, I understand that Apple’s growth will probably slow down…a lot. With Chinese growth slowing and with no product coming down the pipeline to match the importance of the iPhone 6, growth might be very modest in the next few years ahead. But slow enough to justify AAPL trading at half the valuation of the S&P 500? Seriously, even boring, slow-growth utilities like Duke Energy (DUK) sport higher multiples. Duke sports a forward P/E of 13.9.

I think Icahn is far too optimistic about some of AAPL’s current projects. He sees an Apple paid TV service and car as being major moneymakers. Hey, maybe they will, maybe they won’t. We don’t have enough information to draw meaningful conclusions.

But it really doesn’t matter. If Apple never came out with another successful product, its current portfolio alone would make it attractive as a value stock. At these valuations, there isn’t exactly a lot of optimism built into the share price.

Cash Hoard Is Ridiculous

Back in July, I mentioned Apple as a stock with “too much” cash, and broke down the numbers. They’re worth repeating today.

If AAPL’s $203 billion in cash and marketable securities were a standalone company, they would be significantly bigger than Walt Disney (DIS) and Anheuser-Busch InBev (BUD) by market capitalization…and only about $40 billion short of Facebook (FB). Even allowing for punishing tax rates on Apple’s cash held offshore, Apple has enough cash in the bank to sustain its dividend at current levels for years … without earning a single dime in additional profit.

Yes, you read that right. Apple could simply break even for the next 10 years, not turning profit at all, and it would have enough cash to maintain its dividend. That’s not with zero profit growth. That’s with zero proft…period.

And the most amazing thing is that Apple’s cash hoard has continued to expand even while a disproportionate share of it gets dedicated to dividends and share repurchases.

Over the past year, Apple has raised its dividend by 11% and shrunk its shares outstanding by about 5%. And I expect plenty more to come.

Taking the Estimize consensus estimate for next year’s earnings and assigning a ridiculously conservative multiple of 15 gets you to $143 per share, or roughly 30% higher than today’s prices. So while Mr. Icahn might be a little on the aggressive side, I have to agree with him in principle. Apple one of the very best value plays available today.

Disclosures: Long AAPL

Charles Lewis Sizemore, CFA, is chief investment officer of the investment firm Sizemore Capital Management and the author of the Sizemore Insights blog. 

Photo credit: Insider Monkey

Disclaimer: This material is provided for informational purposes only, as of the date hereof, and is subject to change without notice. This material may not be suitable for all investors and is not intended to be an offer, or the solicitation of any offer, to buy or sell any securities nor is it intended to be investment advice. You should speak to a financial advisor before attempting to implement any of the strategies discussed in this material. There is risk in any investment in traded securities, and all investment strategies discussed in this material have the possibility of loss. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The author of the material or a related party will often have an interest in the securities discussed. Please see Full Disclaimer for a full disclaimer.

Read full story · Comments { 6 }