Another boring money post

[Patler]

Incredible indicator?

Well, not from my perpective. It "can" be a good tool, but like anything else it can be abused.

Let's talk about it. My biggest issue with it is that it is a "predictor" of future events and none of those are exceptionally reliable. No one (except Jesus) can predict the future and he ain't into stocks so he doesn't weigh in.

The P/E ratio is a critical component of the calculation of the PEG. The PEG can only begin to be accurate if the P/E is accurate. Plenty of things can make it inaccurate. Some are perfectly honest, some are NOT. Just like the rest of the market (and life too).

So why can the P/E be unreliable?

(redacted for brevity)

I agree completely, and the sad part is that as unreliable as P/E is for the reasons you gave, it is the most reliable component of PEG. The "G" part is predicted growth (either over 3 or 5 years) and historically the estimates aren't close.

A study was done by the Penn State business school covering all published estimates from Wall Street analysts over a 20 year period. Their average annual growth from their 5 year estimates was 14.9% growth. Actual growth for those companies was 9.1% That was based on a 20 year comprehensive study. They weren't much more accurate on the shorter term one year estimates. Their average annual growth from 1 year predictions was 13.8% and the actual growth was 9.8%

Their estimates miss by 50%.

PEG is like any other predictive tool, it should be used in conjunction with other factors and tools to look for consistency or inconsistency in the results. It shouldn't be relied on too heavily in and of itself.

[Patler]

The analysts "could be wrong"? Do you realize that good analysts and investing systems ARE wrong about 45% of the time? They make their money on the 10% differential, being right 55% of the time and wrong 45% of the time. That, and limiting the losses when they are wrong.

There is a saying among analysts that, in the long term, the market is never wrong. What they mean is that the market determines the share price, regardless of what analysts think the price should be. So the market is never wrong, but analysts often are wrong.

So far, over the last two years or so, AAPL has climbed steadily, and that is a good thing. Momentum is a good thing. But, AAPL has missed the analysts share price targets continually. In spite of significant "beats" on earning estimates, the stock has moved upward more slowly than analysts have predicted, and that is a bad thing, because analysts' share price estimates are based on their earnings estimates. While AAPL has exceeding the analysts earnings estimates significantly, the share price has not hit the analysts targets.

In other words, the market has been less impressed with AAPL's performance than the analysts have been. That makes AAPL a stock that should be watched closely. If they ever barely beat the consensus earnings estimates, or miss it, the stock could top out. In short, the market may determine the "correct" P/E for AAPL to be far different than analysts think it should be.

The outlandish sales estimates like what you quoted give me concern as an investor. The more aggressive the analysts become in their sales estimates, the more likely it will be that AAPL will miss one. A miss from a company that has routinely beaten estimates by a lot will stop the share price momentum dead in its tracks.

I agree completely, and the sad part is that as unreliable as P/E is for the reasons you gave, it is the most reliable component of PEG. The "G" part is predicted growth (either over 3 or 5 years) and historically the estimates aren't close.

A study was done by the Penn State business school covering all published estimates from Wall Street analysts over a 20 year period. Their average annual growth from their 5 year estimates was 14.9% growth. Actual growth for those companies was 9.1% That was based on a 20 year comprehensive study. They weren't much more accurate on the shorter term one year estimates. Their average annual growth from 1 year predictions was 13.8% and the actual growth was 9.8%

Their estimates miss by 50%.

PEG is like any other predictive tool, it should be used in conjunction with other factors and tools to look for consistency or inconsistency in the results. It shouldn't be relied on too heavily in and of itself.

Little did I realize that when I said AAPL would eventually have a quarterly "miss" that it would be the very next one.