Case Study Of Financial Values

We are interested in obtaining the asset beta for Collinsville investment. Here from the reading material, we find there were altogether 6 chemical companies that produce sodium chlorates. They are Hooker, Pennwalt, American, Kerr-McGee, Brunswick and Southern. However, since we are evaluating the addition of a sodium chlorate plant, the two firms (Brunswick and Southern) who specialize in producing sodium chlorate are likely the best “twins”. To determine the asset betas of each company, we

The table below shows the equity betas for the firms presented in the case (using Jan-92 to Dec-96 equal weight NYSE/AMEX/NASDAQ as market portfolio):

Here we choose VW NYSE, AMEX, and NASDAQ data as market returns, because it’s value weighted and more reliable. The results show CSC’s equity beta = 2.27, QRG’s equity beta = 1.79.

Beta is the slope of the characteristic line. As shown in appendix1, we use the monthly historical data from April 2003 to April 2008 to graph SCL. We use S&P 500 as the market because it contains the stocks of 500 Large-Cap corporations and can reflect the market change broadly. As shown in exhibit 1, we can get the SCL: Ri-Rf = - 0.001 + 0.1649(Rm - Rf). So the beta is 0.1649 and the alpha (intercept) is -0.001. From the regression line, we find the R square is only 0.103. It reflects the degree that X variable explains Y variable is 10.3%. That is, Ri-Rf has no close relationship with Rm-Rf. In addition, due to the fact that beta is only 0.1649, it also provides the same result which Ri-Rf and Rm-Rf have no strong positive relationship. It is a good issue to consider why Wal-Mart stock return does not relate with S&P 500 return very well. From exhibit 2, we find the Wal-Mart price did not change very much while S&P 500 price went up. The major reasons may be that S&P 500 includes many high-tech stocks and those stocks performed very well during the period; therefore the volatility is greater than Wal-Mart. Moreover, maybe Wal-Mart has lower weight in S&P 500 so its trend of price change is different from S&P 500. From exhibit2, we also find Wal-Mart had good relationship with S&P 500 before 2004. To examine the situation, we use the data from 1998 to 2003 and find the SCL

11. A company has a $90 million portfolio with a beta of 1.5. The S & P index is currently standing at 3000. Futures contracts on $250 times the index can be traded. What trade is necessary to change the beta of the portfolio to one?

As of November 17, 2017, we had a negative return of 7.46%, whereas the benchmark index generated a return of 3.48%, meaning that we underperformed the benchmark by 10.94%. The decrease in market value of common stock holdings accounted for approximately 3.46% of the total loss, and losses from futures contracts accounted for approximately 4%. The standard deviation of our portfolio was 3.41%. Our portfolio had a shape ratio of -2.35%, and the information ratio was computed to be -9.6%.

* Stock Beta: Exhibit 5 shows a detailed measurement of the company’s stock returns in relation to the rest of the market through 5-year historical price and index data. The analysis includes monthly returns of both the NYSE and the S&P 500 index in order to capture a comprehensive view of the market return. In each comparison, the monthly returns of the Target stock and market are plotted on Y-axis and X-axis respectively to get the regression line’s slope or beta. The analysis arrives at an average beta of 0.988 which indicates a similar movement of Target stock’s returns in comparison to the whole market over time.

The regression that we performed in excel for both stocks yielded a beta of .73576 for Reynolds, and a beta of 1.4198 for Hasbro. In question 2 we learned that although Reynolds stock was riskier independently, adding it to the portfolio made it more diversified compared to adding Hasbro, due to the fact that it was less correlated to the market portfolio. Beta is a measure of the volatility, or systematic risk, of a security or a portfolio in comparison to the market as a whole. Therefore, since the beta of Reynolds is lower than Hasbro, our beta calculations align with the fact that Reynolds stock makes the overall portfolio less risky. This finding is also intuitive when considering the nature of the companies; Reynolds is a Tobacco company meaning that is should be less sensitive to changes in market conditions than a toy company like Hasbro.

When combining the figures for ROE, ROA and the DuPont analysis it appears that the company is using leverage favourably. ROE is greater than ROA and assets are greater than equity. This is a positive sign for shareholders as it suggests a good investment return in a company that is managing its shareholder equity well (Evans & McDowell, 2009).

As of 2005, Value Trust had outperformed its benchmark index, the S&P 500, for 14 years consecutively. Given that the next longest period of sustained performance was only half as long, 14 consecutive years of excellent performance set a record as the longest streak of success for any manager in the mutual-fund industry. The average annual total return for the past 15 years was 14.6%, which was higher than the S&P’s 500 by 3.67%. Value Trust had 36 holdings, 10 of which accounted for nearly 50% of the fund’s assets. Morningstar gave Value Trust a five-star rating.

Return on Total Assets was 4.43% which is below five percent. That indicates that the company is not accurately converting its assets into profit. The total for Return on Stockholders’ Equity was 8.89%, however financial analysts prefer ROE to range between 15-20 %. The company’s low ROE indicates that the company is not generating profit with new investments. Lastly, Debt-to-Equity ratio for the company was 1.01 which indicates that investors and creditors are equally sharing assets. In the view of creditors, they see a high ratio as a risk factor because it can indicate that investors are not investing due to the company’s overall performance. The totals of these three ratios demonstrate that the company’s financial state is not as healthy as it should be.

We use the equation ri=(Pt-Pt-1+Dt)/Pt-1 to calculate the monthly return of stock of Charles Schwab Corp, Quick & Reilly Group and Waterhouse Investor Srvcs. Then we have two methods to calculate the Beta of Equity for each company.

The return on equity, ROE, is as high as 20.69% (above 15%). It illustrate that the RL Corporation uses the investors’ money pretty effectively. As of return of assets, equals to 13.10%, which reveals how much profit a company earns for every dollar of its assets. Both ROE and ROA for RL Corporation seems really good and they provide a picture that managers are doing a good job of generating return from shareholders’ investments.

The equity beta given is 0.97, calculated for the period 1986 – 1987 using the stock returns. This beta gives us the risk attached to Marriott Corporation’s shares.

For the study purpose the daily changes in performance of Mutual funds were analyzed in relation to other Mutual fund company and also to the daily volatility in the National Stock Exchange of India benchmark Index (NIFTY) and national stock exchange and Bombay national exchange