Transcript Chapter 4 MARKET-BASED VALUATION: PRICE MULTIPLES

Chapter 4
MARKET-BASED
VALUATION: PRICE
MULTIPLES
Introduction


Price multiples are ratios of a stock’s market
price to some measure of value per share. A
price multiple summarizes in a single number a
valuation relationship to a familiar quantity such
as earnings, sales, or book value per share.
Momentum indicators relate either price or a
fundamental (such as earnings) to the time
series of their own past values, or in some cases
to their expected value.
Organization of chapter 4






Section 2--the economic
context of price multiples.
Section 3--price-to-earnings
(P/E) multiples
Section 4--price-to-book (P/B)
multiples
Section 5--price-to-sales (P/S)
multiples
Section 6--price-to-cash flow
(P/CF) multiples.
Section 7--the ratio of
enterprise value to EBITDA
(enterprise value is the total
market value of all sources of
financing including common
stock)





Section 8--Because the ratio of
price to dividends is not
defined for stocks that do not
pay dividends, we discuss
valuation in terms of dividend
yield (D/P)
Section 9--issues in using
price multiples internationally
Section 10--momentum
valuation indicators
Section 11--Some practical
aspects of using valuation
indicators in investment
management
Section 12--summary
Method of comparables


The method of comparables involves using a
price multiple to evaluate whether an asset is
relatively fairly valued, relatively undervalued, or
relatively overvalued in relation to a benchmark
value of the multiple.
Choices for the benchmark value of a multiple
include the multiple of a closely matched
individual stock and the average or median
value of the multiple for the stock’s peer group of
companies or industry.
Method of comparables

The economic rationale underlying the method of
comparables is the law of one price—the economic
principle that two identical assets should sell at the same
price.


The method of comparables is perhaps the most widely used
approach for analysts reporting valuation judgments on the basis
of price multiples.
If we may find that an asset is undervalued relative to a
comparison asset or group of assets, and we may
expect the asset to outperform the comparison asset or
assets on a relative basis.

However, if the comparison asset or assets themselves are not
efficiently priced, the stock may not be undervalued—it could be
fairly valued or even overvalued (on an absolute basis).
Method based on forecasted
fundamentals

A price multiple can be related to
fundamentals through a DCF model.
 An
example: in Chapter 2 we explained the
price–earnings ratio in terms of perhaps the
simplest DCF model, the Gordon growth
dividend discount model.
Justified price multiple
A justified price multiple for the stock is
the estimated fair value of that multiple.
 We can justify a multiple based on the
method of comparables or the method
based on forecasted fundamentals.
 The justified price multiple is also called
the warranted price multiple or the
intrinsic price multiple.

The price/earnings approach

In the first edition of Security Analysis, Benjamin Graham and David
L. Dodd (1934) described common stock valuation based on price–
earnings ratios as the standard method of that era.


The price–earnings (P/E) ratio is still the most familiar valuation
measure today.
Our discussion:



rationales offered by analysts for its use, as well as possible drawbacks.
two chief variations of the P/E, the trailing P/E and the leading P/E.
Accounting issues: Market price is definitely determinable and presents
no special problems of interpretation. However, the denominator,
earnings per share, is based on the complex rules of accrual accounting
and does present important issues of interpretation. There are several
accounting issues, as well as adjustments analysts can make to obtain
more meaningful price–earnings ratios.
Rationales for the use of P/E ratios



Earning power is a chief driver of investment
value. Earnings per share (EPS), the
denominator of the price–earnings ratio, is
perhaps the chief focus of security analysts’
attention.
The price–earnings ratio is widely recognized
and used by investors.
Differences in price–earnings ratios may be
related to differences in long-run average
returns, according to empirical research.
Drawbacks to P/E ratios
Drawbacks based on nature of EPS.
 EPS can be negative. The P/E ratio does not make
economic sense with a negative denominator.
 The components of earnings that are on-going or
recurrent are most important in determining intrinsic
value. However, earnings often have volatile, transient
components, making the analyst’s task difficult.
 Management can exercise its discretion within allowable
accounting practices to distort earnings per share as an
accurate reflection of economic performance. Distortions
can affect the comparability of P/E ratios across
companies.
Accounting issues with P/E ratios


In calculating a P/E ratio, the current price for
publicly traded companies is generally easily
obtained and unambiguous.
Determining the earnings figure to be used in
the denominator, however, is not as
straightforward. Two issues are
 the
time horizon over which earnings are measured,
which results in two chief alternative definitions of the
price–earnings ratio; and
 adjustments to accounting earnings that the analyst
may make so that P/Es are comparable across
companies.
Trailing and leading P/E’s
The two chief definitions of P/E are trailing P/E and leading P/E.



The trailing P/E (sometimes referred to as current P/E) of a stock
is the current market price of the stock divided by the most recent
four quarters’ earnings per share. The EPS in such calculations are
sometimes referred to as trailing twelve months (TTM) EPS. Trailing
P/E is the price–earnings ratio published in stock listings of financial
newspapers.
The leading P/E (also called the forward P/E or the prospective
P/E) is calculated by dividing the current price by next year’s
expected earnings.
First Call/Thomson Financial reports as the “current P/E” market
price divided by the last reported annual earnings per share. Value
Line reports as the “P/E” market price divided by the sum of the
preceding two quarters’ trailing earnings and the next two quarters’
expected earnings.
Issues with trailing P/E’s
When calculating a P/E ratio using trailing
earnings, care must be taken in determining the
EPS number. The issues include
 transitory, nonrecurring components of earnings
that are company-specific;
 transitory components of earnings due to
cyclicality (business or industry cyclicality);
 differences in accounting methods; and
 potential dilution of earnings per share.
Cyclicality of P/E’s

Because of cyclic effects, the most recent four quarters of earnings
may not accurately reflect the average or long-term earnings power
of the business, particularly for cyclical businesses—businesses
with high sensitivity to business or industry cycle influences. Trailing
earnings per share for such stocks are often depressed or negative
at the bottom of the cycle and unusually high at the top of the cycle.

Empirically, P/Es for cyclical companies are often highly volatile over
a cycle without any change in business prospects: high P/Es on
depressed EPS at the bottom of the cycle and low P/Es on
unusually high EPS at the top of the cycle, a countercyclical property
of P/Es known as the Molodovsky effect. Named after Nicholas
Molodovsky who wrote on this in the 1950s. P/Es may be negatively
related to the recent earnings growth rate but positively related to
anticipated future growth rate, because of expected rebounds in
earnings.
Normalized P/E’s
Nomalized EPS can be used to create a normalized P/E. Two methods
for nomalizing EPS?
 The method of historical average EPS. Normal EPS is calculated as
average EPS over the most recent full cycle.
 The method of average ROE. Normal EPS is calculated as the
average return on equity from the most recent full cycle, multiplied
by current book value per share.
Which method is preferred?
 The first method is one of several possible statistical approaches to
the problem of cyclical earnings. The method does not account for
changes in the business’s size, however.
 The second alternative, by using recent book value per share,
reflects more accurately the effect on EPS of growth or shrinkage in
the company’s size. For that reason, the method of average ROE is
sometimes preferred.
Basic versus diluted EPS


The analyst should consider the impact of potential
dilution on earnings per share. Dilution refers to the
reduction in the proportional ownership interests as a
result of the issuance of new shares.
Companies are required to present both basic earnings
per share and diluted earnings per share.


Basic earnings per share reflect total earnings divided by the
weighted average number of shares actually outstanding during
the period.
Diluted earnings per share reflect division by the number of
shares that would be outstanding if holders of securities such as
executive stock options, equity warrants, and convertible bonds
exercised their options to obtain common stock.
Negative earnings

The security with the lowest positive value of a P/E has the lowest purchase
cost per currency unit of earnings among the securities ranked. However,
negative earnings result in a negative P/E. The negative P/E security will
rank below the lowest positive value P/E security but, because earnings are
negative, the negative P/E security is actually the most costly in terms of
earnings purchased. Negative P/Es are not meaningful.

In some cases, you might handle negative EPS by using normal EPS in its
place. Also, when trailing EPS is negative, year-ahead EPS and so the
leading P/E may be positive. However, in any case where the analyst is
interested in a ranking, an available solution (applicable to any ratio
involving a quantity that can be negative or zero) is to restate the ratio with
price in the denominator, because price is never negative.

The reciprocal of P/E is E/P, the earnings yield. Ranked by earnings yields
from highest to lowest, the securities are correctly ranked from cheapest to
most costly in terms of the amount of earnings one unit of currency buys.
Look-ahead bias



Look-ahead bias sometimes exists with trialing
P/E’s
Look-ahead bias is the use of information that
is not contemporaneously available in computing
a quantity.
Stock selection disciplines involving P/Es, and
other price multiples in general. Analysts may
be using information that doesn’t exist at the
time they are making investment decisions.
Justified P/E in a DCF model

DCF valuation models can be used to develop an estimate of the justified P/E for a
stock.




In the Gordon growth form of the dividend discount model, the P/E is calculated using these
two expressions (from chapter 2)
The leading P/E is:
P0
D /E
1 b
 1 1 
E1
rg
rg
P
E0
D (1  g ) / E0 (1  b)(1  g )

rg
rg
0 trailing
The
 0 P/E is:
Both expressions state P/E as a function of two fundamentals: the stock’s required
rate of return, r, reflecting its risk, and the expected (stable) dividend growth rate, g.
The dividend payout ratio, 1 – b, also enters into the expression. The stock’s justified
P/E based on forecasted fundamentals.
Justified P/E example
For FPL Group, Inc. (FPL), a utility analyst,
forecasts a long-term payout rate of 50 percent,
a long-term growth rate of 5 percent, and a
required rate of return of 9 percent. Based upon
these forecasts of fundamentals, what is FPL’s
justified leading P/E and trailing P/E?
P 1  b justified
1  0.50 P/E is:
Leading


 12.5
0
E1
rg
0.09  0.05
P (1  bjustified
)(1  g ) (1  0P/E
.5)(1  0.is:
05)
Trailing


 13.125
0
E0
rg
0.09  0.05
Benchmark P/E’s
The choices for the benchmark value of the P/E that have
appeared in practice include
 The P/E of the most closely matched individual stock.
 The average or median value of the P/E for the
company’s peer group of companies within an industry.
 The average or median value of the P/E for the
company’s industry or sector.
 The P/E for a representative equity index
 An average past value of the P/E for the stock.
Valuation errors are probably less likely when we use an
equity index or a group of stocks than when we use a
single stock, because the former choices involve an
averaging.
PEG ratios


One metric that appears to address the impact of earnings growth
on P/E ratios is P/E to growth (PEG) ratio. The PEG ratio is
calculated as the stock’s P/E divided by the expected earnings
growth rate. The ratio in effect calculates a stock’s P/E per unit of
expected growth. Stocks with lower PEGs are more attractive than
stocks with higher PEGs, all else equal.
The PEG ratio is useful, but must be used with care for several
reasons:

The ratio assumes a linear relationship between P/E ratios and growth.
The model for P/E in terms of DDM shows that in theory the relationship
is not linear.
 The ratio does not factor in differences in risk, a very important
component of P/E ratios.
 The ratio does not account for differences in the duration of growth. For
example, dividing P/E ratios by short-term (5 year) growth forecasts
may not capture differences in growth in long-term growth prospects.
P/E ratios based on regressions





A justified P/E based on forecasted fundamentals can be derived from a
cross-sectional regression of P/E on the fundamentals.
Kisor and Whitbeck (1963) and Malkiel and Cragg (1970) pioneered this
approach. The P/Es, and stock and company characteristics thought to
determine P/E, are measured as of a given year for a group of stocks. The
P/Es are regressed against the stock and company characteristics. The
estimated equation shows the relationships in the data set between P/E and
the characteristics for that group of stocks and for that time period.
The Kisor and Whitbeck study included the historical growth rate in
earnings, the dividend payout ratio, and the standard deviation of EPS
changes as explanatory (independent) variables.
Malkiel and Cragg (1970) introduced explanatory variables based on
expectations (alongside regressions on historical values).
The analyst can in fact conduct such cross-sectional regressions using any
set of variables he or she believes are the determinants of investment
value. Other DCF models besides the DDM can serve as the source of
ideas for such variables
P/E ratios based on regressions

A food company has a beta of 0.9, a dividend payout ratio of 0.45,
and an earnings growth rate of 0.08. The estimated regression for a
group of other stocks in the same industry is
Predicted P/E = 12.12 + (2.25  DPR) – (0.20  beta) + (14.43  EGR)





Where DPR = the dividend payout ratio, beta = the stock’s beta,
and EGR = the five-year earnings growth rate
1. What is the predicted P/E?
2. If the stock’s actual trailing P/E is 18, is the stock fairly valued,
overvalued, or undervalued?
Solution to 1. Predicted P/E = 12.12 + (2.25  0.45) – (0.20  0.9) +
(14.43  0.08) = 14.1. The predicted P/E is 14.1.
Solution to 2. Because the predicted P/E of 14.1 is less than the
actual P/E of 18, the stock appears to be overvalued (selling at a
higher multiple than is justified by its fundamentals).
The Fed Model

The Federal Reserve Board uses one such valuation
model that relates the inverse of the S&P 500 P/E, the
earnings yield, to the yield to maturity on 10-year
Treasury Bonds. Earnings yield = E/P, where the Fed
uses expected earnings for the next 12 months.

The Fed’s model asserts that the market is overvalued
when the stock market’s current earnings yield is less
than the 10-year Treasury bond yield. The intuition is that
when Treasury bonds yield more than the earnings yield
on the stock market, which is riskier than bonds, stocks
are an unattractive investment.
The Yardeni Model



:
Edward Yardeni has developed a model that incorporates the expected
growth rate in earnings—a variable that is missing in the Fed model.
Yardeni’s model is
CEY = CBY – b  LTEG + residual
CEY is the current earnings yield on the market index, CBY is the current
Moody’s A-rated corporate bond yield and LTEG is the consensus five-year
earnings growth rate forecast for the market index. The coefficient b
measures the weight the market gives to five-year earnings projections
(recall that the expression for P/E in terms of the Gordon growth model is
based upon the long-term sustainable growth rate and that five-year
forecasts of growth may not be sustainable). Note that while CBY
incorporates a default risk premium relative to T-bonds, it does not
incorporate an equity risk premium per se.
Yardeni has found that the historical coefficient b has averaged 0.10. Noting
that CEY is E/P and taking the inverse of both sides of this equation,
YardeniPobtains the following
expression for the justified P/E on the market
1

E (CBY - b  LTEG)
Price to Book Value approach


In the P/E ratio, the measure of value, EPS, is a
flow variable relating to the income statement.
By contrast, the measure of value in the P/B
ratio, book value per share, is a stock or level
variable coming from the balance sheet.
Intuitively, book value per share attempts to
represent the investment that common
shareholders have made in the company, on a
per-share basis.
Rationales for use of P/B ratio





Because book value is a cumulative balance sheet amount, book
value is generally positive even when EPS is negative. We can
generally use P/B when EPS is negative, whereas P/E based on a
negative EPS is not meaningful.
Because book value per share is more stable than EPS, P/B may be
more meaningful than P/E when EPS are abnormally high or low, or
are highly variable.
As a measure of net asset value per share, book value per share
has been viewed as appropriate for valuing companies composed
chiefly of liquid assets, such as finance, investment, insurance, and
banking institutions. For such companies, book values of assets
may approximate market values.
Book value has also been used in valuation of companies that are
not expected to continue as a going concern.
Differences in P/B ratios may be related to differences in long-run
average returns, according to empirical research.
Possible drawbacks to P/B ratios




Other assets besides those recognized in accounting may be critical
operating factors. For example, in many service companies human is more
important than physical capital as an operating factor.
P/B can be misleading as a valuation indicator when there are significant
differences among the level of assets employed by companies.
Accounting effects on book value may compromise book value as a
measure of shareholders’ investment in the company. As one example,
book value can understate shareholders’ investment as a result of the
expensing of investment in research and development (R&D). Such
expenditures often positively affect income over many periods and in
principle create assets.
In the accounting of most countries, including the United States, book value
largely reflects the historical purchase costs of assets, as well as
accumulated accounting depreciation expenses. Inflation as well as
technological change eventually drive a wedge between the book value and
the market value of assets. As a result, book value per share often poorly
reflects the value of shareholders’ investments.
Computation of book value

The computation of book value is as follows:
(Shareholders’ equity) minus (the total value of equity
claims that are senior to common stock) = Common
shareholders’ equity
(Common shareholders’ equity)/(number of common stock
shares outstanding) = book value per share

Possible senior claims to common stock include the
value of preferred stock and dividends in arrears on
preferred stock.
Occasional adjustments to book
value



Tangible book value per share--subtracting reported intangible assets from the
balance sheet from common shareholders’ equity. The analyst should be familiar with
the calculation. However, from the viewpoint of financial theory, the general exclusion
of intangibles is not warranted. As mentioned earlier, the non-inclusion in book value
of any asset that may generate income can weaken book value as a reflection of
actual value.
To reflect current values, the balance sheet should be adjusted for significant offbalance sheet assets and liabilities and for differences in the fair value of these
assets/liabilities from recorded accounting amounts. Internationally, accounting
methods currently report some assets/liabilities at historical cost (with some
adjustments) and others at fair value. For example, assets such as land or
equipment are reported at their historical acquisitions cost, and in the case of
equipment are being depreciated over their useful lives. These assets may have
appreciated over time, or declined in value more than is reflected in the depreciation
computation. Other assets such as investments in marketable securities are reported
at fair market value. Reporting assets at fair value would make P/B more relevant for
valuation (including comparisons across companies).
Other adjustments for comparability--one company may be using FIFO and a peer
company may be using LIFO, which in an inflationary environment will generally
understate inventory values. To more accurately assess the relative valuation of the
two companies, the analyst should restate the book value of the company using LIFO
to what it would be on a FIFO basis.
Justified P/B ratio

We can use fundamental forecasts to estimate a stock’s justified P/B ratio.
For example, assuming the Gordon growth model and using the expression
g = b  ROE for the sustainable growth rate, the expression for the justified
P0 based
ROE
 gmost recent book value (B0) is
P/B ratio
on the
B0

rg

For example, if a business’s ROE is 12 percent, its required rate of return is
10 percent, and its expected growth rate is 7 percent, then its justified P/B
based on fundamentals is (0.12  0.07)/(0.10  0.07) = 1.7.

Further insight into the P/B ratio comes from the residual income model,
which was mentioned in Chapter 2 and will discussed in detail in Chapter 5.
The expression for the justified P/B ratio based on the residual income
P0 is Present value of expected future residual earnings
valuation
 1
B0
B0
Rationales for Price/Sales ratios





Sales are generally less subject to distortion or manipulation than
other fundamentals such as EPS or book value. Through
discretionary accounting decisions concerning expenses, for
example, management can distort EPS as a reflection of economic
performance. In contrast, total sales, as the top line in the income
statement, is prior to any expenses.
Sales are positive even when EPS is negative. Therefore, we can
use P/S when EPS is negative, whereas P/E based on a negative
EPS is not meaningful.
Because sales are generally more stable than EPS, which reflects
operating and financial leverage, P/S is generally more stable than
P/E. P/S may be more meaningful than P/E when EPS is abnormally
high or low.
P/S has been viewed as appropriate for valuing the stock of mature,
cyclical, and zero income companies.
Differences in P/S ratios may be related to differences in long-run
average returns, according to empirical research.
Drawbacks to P/S ratios



A business may show high growth in sales,
although the business is not operating profitably
as judged by earnings and cash flow from
operations. To have value as a going concern, a
business must ultimately generate earnings and
cash.
The P/S ratio does not reflect differences in cost
structures across companies.
Although relatively robust with respect to
manipulation, there is potential through revenue
recognition practices to distort the P/S ratio.
Justified P/S ratio

Like other multiples, the P/S multiple can be
linked to DCF models. In terms of the Gordon
growth
wecan
P (model,
E / S )(1
b)(1state
 g ) P/S as
0
S0

0
0
rg
Rationales for Price/Cash flow
ratios




Cash flow is less subject to manipulation by
management than earnings. Cash flow from operations,
precisely defined, can be manipulated only through “real”
activities, such as the sale of receivables.
Because cash flow is generally more stable than
earnings, price-to-cash flow is generally more stable
than P/E.
Using price to cash flow rather than P/E addresses the
issue of differences in accounting conservatism between
companies (differences in the quality of earnings).
Differences in price to cash flow may be related to
differences in long-run average returns, according to
empirical research.
Drawbacks to Price/Cash flow
ratios


When the EPS plus non-cash charges
approximation to cash flow from operations is
used, items affecting actual cash flow from
operations such as non-cash revenue and net
changes in working capital are ignored.
Theory views free cash flow rather than cash
flow as the appropriate variable for valuation.
We can use P/FCFE ratios but FCFE has the
possible drawback of being more volatile
compared to CF for many businesses. FCFE is
also more frequently negative than CF.
Four common cash flow measures

In practice, analysts and vendors of data often use simple approximations to
cash flow from operations in calculating cash flow in price-to-cash flow.

A representative approximation specifies cash flow per share as EPS plus
per-share depreciation, amortization, and depletion. We call this the
earnings-plus-non-cash charges definition and use the symbol CF for it. We
will also introduce more technically accurate cash flow concepts:
cash flow from operations (CFO)
free cash flow to equity (FCFE), and
EBITDA, an estimate of pre-interest, pre-tax operating cash flow.




Most frequently, trailing price-to-cash flow ratios are reported. A trailing
price-to-cash flow ratio is calculated as the current market price divided by
the sum of the most recent four quarters’ cash flow per share. A fiscal year
definition is also possible, just as in the case of EPS.
Enterprise value / EBITDA




We don’t like the P/EBITDA multiple, because EBITDA is
a flow to both debt and equity. A multiple using total
company value in the numerator was logically more
appropriate.
Enterprise value to EBITDA responds to this need.
Enterprise value (EV) is total company value (the
market value of debt, common equity, and preferred
equity) minus the value of cash and investments.
Because the numerator is enterprise value, EV/EBITDA
is a valuation indicator for the overall company rather
than common stock. If the analyst can assume that the
business’s debt and preferred stock (if any) are efficiently
priced, the analyst can also draw an inference about the
valuation of common equity.
Rationales for EV / EBITDA



EV/EBITDA may be more appropriate than P/E for
comparing companies with different financial leverage
(debt), because EBITDA is a pre-interest earnings figure,
in contrast to EPS, which is post-interest.
By adding back depreciation and amortization, EBITDA
controls for differences in depreciation and amortization
across businesses. For this reason, EV/EBITDA is
frequently used in the valuation of capital-intensive
businesses (for example, cable companies and steel
companies).
EBITDA is frequently positive when EPS is negative.
Possible drawbacks to EV /
EBITDA

EBITDA will overestimate cash flow from operations if
working capital is growing. EBITDA also ignores the
effects of differences in revenue recognition policy on
cash flow from operations.

Free cash flow to the firm, which directly reflects the
amount of required capital expenditures, has a stronger
link to valuation theory than EBITDA. Only if depreciation
expenses match capital expenditures do we expect
EBITDA to reflect differences in businesses’ capital
programs. This can be meaningful for the capitalintensive businesses to which this multiple is often
applied.
Rationales and drawbacks of
dividend yield
Rationales:
 Dividend yield is a component of total return.
 Dividends are a less risky component of total return than capital
appreciation.
Drawbacks:
 Dividend yield is just one component of total return; not to use all
information related to expected return is not optimal.
 Dividends paid now displace earnings in all future periods (a
concept known as the dividend displacement of earnings).
Investors trade off future earnings growth to receive higher current
dividends.
 The argument about the relative safety of dividends presupposes
that the market prices reflect in a biased way differences in the
relative risk of the components of return.
Justified dividend yields




For practical purposes, dividend yield, D/P is preferred
over P/D. (zero dividends are a problem)
Trailing dividend yield is generally calculated as four
times the most recent quarterly per-share dividend
divided by the current market price per share. (The most
recent quarterly dividend times four is known as the
dividend rate.)
The leading dividend yield is calculated as forecasted
dividends per share over the next year divided by the
current market price per share.
r  g dividend yield in a Gordon model is:
TheDjustified
0

P0 1  g
International differences
Comparing companies across borders
frequently involves accounting method
differences, cultural differences, economic
differences, and resulting differences in
risk and growth opportunities.
 For example, P/E ratios for individual
companies in the same industry across
borders have been found to vary widely.

Unexpected earnings (earnings
surprise)




Momentum indicators based on price, such as the
relative strength indicator discussed below, have also
been referred to as technical indicators.
Unexpected earnings (also called earnings surprise)
iss the difference between reported earnings and
expected earnings
UEt = EPSt – E(EPSt)
where UEt is the unexpected earnings per share for
quarter t, EPSt is the reported earnings per share for
quarter t, and E(EPSt) is the expected earnings per
share for the quarter.
For example, a stock with reported quarterly earnings of
$1.05 and expected earnings of $1.00 would have a
positive earnings surprise of $0.05.
Standardized unexpected earnings

The same rationale lies behind standardized
unexpected
(SUE). SUE is defined as
EPSt earnings
E (EPSt )
SUEt 

σ  EPSt  E (EPSt )
where the numerator is the unexpected earnings
for t and the denominator, σ[EPSt – E(EPSt)], is
the standard deviation of past unexpected
earnings over some period prior to time t, for
example the 20 quarters prior to t as in Latané
and Jones (1979), the article that introduced the
SUE concept.
Relative strength (momentum)



Relative strength (RSTR) indicators compare a stock’s
performance during a period either to its own past performance or to
the performance of some group of stocks. The simplest relative
strength indicator of the first type is the stock’s compound rate of
return over some specified time, such as six months or one year.[
Other definitions relate a stock’s return over a recent period to its
return over a longer period that includes the more recent period.
A simple relative strength indicator of the second type is the stock’s
performance divided by the performance of an equity index. If the
value of this ratio is increasing, the stock price is increasing relative
to the index and is displaying positive relative strength. Often the
relative strength indicator may be scaled to 1.0 at the beginning of
the study period. If the stock and the index go up at a higher (lower)
rate, for example, then relative strength will be above (below) 1.0.
Relative strength in this sense is often calculated for industries as
well as individual stocks.