Street Capitalist: Event Driven Value Investments

Today, while browsing twitter I noticed Abnormal Returns post about JNJ yielding more than 10 year treasuries. It got me thinking again about the fact that large cap stocks look pretty undervalued right now.

You don’t really get popular by being bullish on large cap stocks – most people actually look down upon it, especially as a value investor. We are supposed to find these hidden gems that nobody knows about. Everybody and their mother knows about Johnson and Johnson. Still, it and a number of other large caps are trading at valuations that are really attractive right now.

Value investing can go either two ways:

1. Buy an undervalued stock with some kind of catalyst and sell once it reaches your target price.

That approach is much more akin to Benjamin Graham and Warren Buffett from his partnership days.

2. Find a great business with excellent growth potential that is trading at an absurdly low price.

This is the approach Warren Buffett honed in his later years.

To me, either approach works. And for my own portfolio, if I can crank out an annualized return of around 15% over an extended period of time, I’ll be pretty happy. The way I look at undervalued large caps is you can sometimes find them trading at levels that are low enough to make it so your potential for capital loss is minimal. Worst case – you lose nothing. Best case – you have bought into a large cap that still has great overseas growth prospects and a healthy dividend. An investment like that can enable you to buy and hold for years.

So what are some names that have been interesting to me?

Johnson and Johnson

AR’s comment about treasury yields versus the yield on Johnson and Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) reminded me of a chart I saw over at Value Investors Club:

I have updated the original chart to compare the past data with JNJ’s current price and the price it hit during the bottom of the financial crisis. As you can see, the company looks amazingly undervalued — especially when compared to the past. Whenever its forward earnings yield and dividend hit levels like this, it is usually an amazing opportunity for investors.

JNJ is getting some heat right now about a recall from their consumer products division, but the company has a history of being around since the Great Depression. With a minuscule amount of net debt ($6B) and almost $20B in EBITDA, the company is at a really sweet spot. Margins are still healthy at above 25% and a return on equity of around 27.5%.

Yes, sales did decrease for 2009, but it was also during a crisis period described as the worst since the Great Depression. In the longer term, I think there are demographic trends that make the company appealing. With our population expected to grow older, JNJ products should be more in demand. In addition, a substantial amount of revenues come from abroad which means that there will be tailwinds for growth outside of the US.

Walmart

Another one I’ve been looking at is Walmart (NYSE:WMT). A while back after hearing Warren Buffett recommend it, I read Sam Walton’s biography Made in America which details how he started Walmart. I came away for a much higher regard for the company, particularly after learning about their humble beginnings. It is truly amazing that Walmart has been able to grow from its humble beginnings as a rural discount retailer to a global corporation. Along the way, they still have not forgotten their ethos of making sure they bring customers the lowest prices.

Some investors have been skeptical about Walmart, especially after the recent decision to let the Chinese yuan rise. Since Walmart sources most of its goods from Chinese manufacturers, a rising yuan will eat into Walmart’s bottom line as they convert from dollars. Since Walmart buys such a massive amount of goods from China, this could impact margins. I think that this is possible, but I am not too worried.

The fact is, capital is mobile and the folks at Walmart are bright enough to realize that if one country becomes too expensive, they can move elsewhere. That kind of mobility is going to pressure the Chinese to keep their currency down because if they don’t, the prices may hurt their exporters. So far, China does not quite have the kind of domestic demand that is necessary to offset a major reduction in American consumption of their goods.

Walmart has a lot going for it. It is by far, the lowest cost distributor and retailer of basic goods. Part of this comes from its amazing supply chain/distribution system. Walmart was one of the first retailers to figure out that a company-wide computerized inventory system would allow them to stock exactly what people want, when they want them. This translates into better inventory turnover numbers.

Vinod Palika has a report on Walmart (PDF) with plenty of data points that show Walmart’s strength relative to peers. In 2001 Walmart inventory was 51 days, in 2010 it decreased to 40 days. For comparison, at Target inventory was at 58 days in 2001 and is now 56 days in 2010. Walmart’s economies of scale help maintain margins. Take advertising, in 2010 Walmart’s ad budget was only 0.6% of sales, comparatively Target spends 2.15% of sales on their ad budget. The best part? Even though Walmart spends less as a percent, they are still spending more overall – $2.4B versus $1.4B. That means Walmart can outspend Target but keep its margins in tact.

Walmart initially had some hurdles breaking into overseas markets, but so far they have corrected that and if you look you can see some impressive growth there. I think for a business as huge as Walmart, which generates large benefits from its size (bargaining power with suppliers) the company should at least get a forward P/E multiple that is greater than 11x. A 15x multiple on 2011′s EPS would result in a share price of about $66 compared to $49 today.

Kraft

If you study Warren Buffett, you’ll see that some of his best investments occur at a time before a business is about to embark on an upward trend in margin expansion. Basically, what he does is find great businesses that are down in the dumps.

When Roberto Goizueta came to Coca-Cola, the business lagged behind Pepsi. Goizueta applied his background as a chemical engineer to the company, in order to standardize certain processes and add efficiency to the Coca-Cola’s operations. These actions reduced expenses. Then, he he culled low return on invested capital operating units from the business to boost overall profitability. These actions dramatically increased margins and magnified shareholder value: Coca-Cola’s market capitalization increased from $4.3B in 1981 to $152B in 1997. To learn more about how Goizueta did it, be sure to read I’d Like the World to Buy a Coke, his biography.

You might be wondering why I am mentioning Coca-Cola when I’m supposed to be talking about Kraft (NYSE:KFT). Back when Irene Rosenfeld announced the merger with Cadbury, Pershing Square’s Bill Ackman released a report which detailed the potential for margin expansion at Kraft:

Ackman’s thesis appears sound. A merger between Kraft and Cadbury, means there is less competition in the marketplace and the combined company may have the ability to raise prices. That might help increase EBIT margins in 2011 to Ackman’s projected 15%. Plus, I think you really cannot ignore the gains in Kraft’s supply chains that will come from this deal. Most people underestimate just how difficult it is to get consumer goods to shops in developing nations where there might be no paved roads. It’s the kind of investment that takes years to refine, but will pay dividends in the future as we increasingly rely on the developing world for growth.

With leading consumer brands from chocolates to macaroni and cheese, combined with 25% of revenues from developing markets (more than any other North American peer) Ackman’s 15x 2012 EPS ($2.70) multiple appears possible. Ackman provides an upper range of 17x 2012 EPS ($2.90). That gives us a share valuation of $41 to $49 versus today’s $28.30. Plus, you get a 4% dividend.

Kraft is obviously not going to have the same kind of dramatic growth that you saw from Coca-Cola during Goizueta’s time as CEO, but it is an illustrative example of how changes in the business can increase its valuation.

Anheuser-Busch InBev

Another interesting large cap that looks undervalued is Anheuser-Busch InBev (NYSE:BUD). The company, formed by the merger of Anheuser-Busch and Brazil’s InBev looks like another case where through a merger there is a potential for substantial cost savings. Anheuser-Busch is a powerhouse in the beer market. The merger effectively created the largest brewer by market cap, at $77.4B. The company boasts 200 different brands, 13 of which have over $1B in sales. Moreover, BUD occupies the #1 or #2 rank in 25 of its top 31 markets.

BUD trades at basically a 9.6% FCF yield which is great given its side. Free cash flow is expected to increase over the next two years, as Anheuser-Busch InBev is able to reduce costs as the two companies integrate. In contrast, Diageo, a market leader in the beer and spirits area has a FCF yield of 6.2% — even though it is less than half ABInBev’s size. I could see BUD trading at about a 6% yield which would be about $77 per share, 60% higher than today’s prices.

So far BUD seems to be making the right inroads in trying to break into the Chinese market. I think that beer and spirits companies are increasingly going to look at Asia for growth. It wont be an overnight process and so if there is some lag between that Asia growth and US sales growth, you might see some pessimism. One thing I particularly like about BUD is because of its size, it should be able to have better margins because of its size. As in the Walmart case, BUD looks poised to spend more on advertising than its peers at a lower percent of sales. This company should be a bargain as long as the management at BUD are willing to take FCF and use it intelligently by paying down debt and pursuing buybacks.

For anyone interested in learning more about the industry, I suggest checking out Beer Wars, a documentary about the beer business. It contrasts small craft breweries with the majors like Budweiser and Molson Coors. You get to learn a lot about how the major breweries have been able to take advantage of our fragmented legal structure to erect huge barriers to entry in the beer business.

Killing a Large Cap

I’ve outlined short reasons why I would be bullish on these companies. The question you have to ask is why these great companies are trading at such low prices. I think there are a few factors. More broadly, into and during the financial crisis, money poured into these stocks as they were seen as safe havens. Some held up and others only had slight price declines relative to the market. When things started to turn, money exited and went into the stocks that got clobbered. So there might be less money in some of these large cap blue chip stocks than others.

Secondly, when you start hearing worries about global growth some of these stocks get affected. Many of them are large enough to provide the liquidity necessary to allow large macro funds to exit in and out. So they might be more susceptible to day-to-day volatility than smaller, less noticed stocks.

Then there is sell side pessimism. Large cap stocks are particularly vulnerable to sell side pessimism. They tend to attract the masses who sell whenever they hear an analyst downgrade a company. Most sell side calls are for the medium term, so whenever there there is some temporary panic the sell side erupts. Such reports tend to discount the longer term potential earnings power behind some of these businesses.

During the financial crisis some analysts claimed people would stop drinking Coca-Cola because of the deteriorating economic situation. Or with Kraft, some analysts feared that private labels made by supermarkets would undercut Kraft’s products. But, the fact is, you can make a bear case for almost any investment. Most people I know kept chugging cans of Coke, even during the March 2009 bottom. People still ate Kraft Mac ‘n Cheese. But none of these companies are a perfect hedge, they almost all hit 52 week lows during the crisis. At the same time, their longer term prospects were much better than the broader market. If you are willing to wait years I’d expect these companies to do quite well. They should at least be able to preserve your capital — especially at the P/Es we see today. That is a critical factor you need to look for in equities given the concerns about inflation.

More Depth

Now, I’ve outlined reasons for why some of the above companies look undervalued and have sustainable competitive advantages. That’s not enough to warrant an investment though — more research needs to be done. Over the next coming weeks I plan to look at a few of them in more depth in terms of analyzing financials and putting together models. If I get some indication of what company readers would be interested in (either by comments or e-mail) I’ll start there first. They can even be large caps not explored in this post. I’ve also started looking at: MasterCard (NYSE:MA) – at 17x EPS for basically an oligopoly, it looks really appealing, Monsanto (NYSE:MON) – their seeds and pesticides are going to be needed by the rest of the world’s farmers, and even some foreign telecoms.

For those of you happy to do your own reading, one of the neat things I noticed is certain big companies have very generous annual report policies. I was able to get 5 years worth of 10Ks mailed to me within a couple days from JNJ and McDonalds.

Some people fret about whether or not they can get an edge when looking at companies that are so large. I think with these blue chip companies, you’re edge is going to come from your discipline. Being willing to ignore downgrade calls and buy when most people are selling. If you can do that, you might be able to own part of a growing business at a price that is low enough to provide you with a satisfactory margin of safety.