This Company’s P/E Is Meaningless

Multiples are very handy in determining a reasonable price to pay for that great company you just found. Find out how best to use these valuation tools.

| More on:
The Motley Fool

This is something many of us mutter when a stock that we own, like, say, Apple, with a supposedly low P/E multiple, takes a dive.  What’s going on here?

How not to use a multiple

It’s very easy for a pundit to stand in front of a crowd and sound smart and informed by proclaiming that Apple has a floor under it because its P/E multiple is 10.  However, this is essentially meaningless information, when delivered in this fashion.

Multiples are completely useless in isolation and especially when trying to predict short term moves in stock prices.  The following table conveys just how little predictive power an earnings multiple can have over a short period of time.  We’re using a selection of well-known U.S. based companies to help demonstrate this point.

Company

P/E LTM

YTD

Facebook (NASDAQ:FB)

n/a

11.6%

Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN)

n/a

6.0%

Google (NASDAQ:GOOG)

23.2

4.2%

Qualcomm (NASDAQ:QCOM)

19.0

-1.9%

Apple (NASDAQ:APPL)

10.4

-16.8%

Source:  Capital IQ

The “cheapest” company of the group, Apple, has had the worst year to date return and the two companies that don’t even have positive earnings have had the best.

In their simplest form, multiples are easy – that’s why you hear so much about them.  In a world that is straining for its next sound bite, multiples are a perfect fit.  It doesn’t take much to look at the table and point to the fact that Google is more richly valued than Apple because it trades at a higher earnings multiple.  Under “classic” value investing theory, cheap stocks rise and expensive stocks fall, therefore buy Apple.  People, not Fools, operate like this!

No shortcuts

To appropriately use a multiple you need to put it into context, and then let time takeover.  There are two ways to give a multiple some meaning – a) compare against the company’s historical range, and b) compare to a group of similar companies.  In addition, don’t just focus on one metric.  Look at the price/earnings as well as the price/book, price/free cash flow, and price/sales on a historical and peer comparison basis.  If they are all pointing towards the same conclusion, there’s a good chance a believable valuation message is being conveyed.

Again, to simply say Apple’s P/E is 10 therefore it’s a buy is poor logic.  However, if that 10 P/E is framed against a 5 year average of 21 and a peer group that trades at 13…..now you’re starting to build a case.

Although the group provided above is somewhat tricky given the rapid change that occurs in the technology space, this historical and peer compare work can be done to some extent for Google, Apple, and Qualcomm.  Relevant information exists for all three.

Sorry to say

For some companies multiples just don’t work.  I would put Amazon and Facebook into this category.  Neither fits very well with criteria a) or b) from above.  Yes, Amazon has been around for a while, but the company is evolving so rapidly that a multiple from two years ago really has no relevance on today, or tomorrow’s valuation.  Facebook has no history.  And neither really has a solid peer group to compare against.

To illustrate how nonsensical multiples can be for companies like Amazon and Facebook, the table below outlines what the analyst community has established as the average one year target price for each, and how that compares to the projected consensus earnings.

Company

Target

EPS

Fwd P/E

Amazon

$310.25

$1.79

173.3

Facebook

$32.96

$0.66

49.9

Source:  Capital IQ

Boss – “What’s your target on Amazon?”

Analyst – “$310.25”

Boss – “How’d you get there?”

Analyst – “I reckon they’re going to earn $1.79 next year and then I just slapped a multiple of 173 on that.  Done.”

Boss – “Good work.”

When an analyst is given the outrageous task of affixing a one year “value” to a company like Amazon or Facebook, outrageous results are sure to follow.

The Foolish Bottom Line

All five of the companies included in this post are leaders in their field and arguably “great” businesses.  If you think you’ve found a great one, don’t schluff off the other important part of the investing equation.  Determining a reasonable price.  Do the work, think long term, use history, use comparables, and use common sense!

Follow us on Twitter for the latest in Foolish investing.

Fool contributor Iain Butler does not own any of the companies mentioned in this post at this time.  David Gardner owns shares of Apple, Amazon.com, Google, and Facebook. Tom Gardner owns shares of Google. The Motley Fool owns shares of Amazon.com, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Qualcomm.

This article represents the opinion of the writer, who may disagree with the “official” recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium service or advisor. We’re Motley! Questioning an investing thesis — even one of our own — helps us all think critically about investing and make decisions that help us become smarter, happier, and richer, so we sometimes publish articles that may not be in line with recommendations, rankings or other content.

More on Investing

coins jump into piggy bank
Dividend Stocks

How to Use Your TFSA to Earn $1,057/Year in Tax-Free Income

Investing $5,000 in each of these high-yield dividend stocks can help you earn over $1,057 per year in tax-free income.

Read more »

data analyze research
Tech Stocks

Is BlackBerry (TSX:BB) a Buy in May 2025?

While its recent downturn might not look pretty, it might be the best opportunity to buy BlackBerry (TSX:BB) stock and…

Read more »

Piggy bank with word TFSA for tax-free savings accounts.
Investing

Where I’d Invest the New $7,000 TFSA Contribution Limit in 2025

If you have $7,000 for the new TFSA contribution increase, here are three stocks I would contemplate adding to the…

Read more »

open vault at bank
Bank Stocks

2 Banking Stocks I’d Buy With $7,000 Whenever They Dip in Price

Two banking stocks are worth buying on the dip and as reliable passive-income providers.

Read more »

Paper Canadian currency of various denominations
Investing

How I’d Invest $7,000 in Financial Sector Stocks for Stability

This Canadian financials ETF may stay insulated from Trump's tariffs.

Read more »

Man in fedora smiles into camera
Dividend Stocks

How I’d Build a $20,000 Retirement Portfolio With These 3 TSX Dividend All-Stars

If you're worried about returns and want to focus on dividends, these dividend stocks are the first to consider.

Read more »

View of high rise corporate buildings in the financial district of Toronto, Canada
Dividend Stocks

If I Could Only Buy and Hold a Single Canadian Stock, This Would Be It

Here's why this high-quality defensive growth stock is one of the best Canadian companies to buy now and hold for…

Read more »

dividends can compound over time
Dividend Stocks

3 Canadian Market Leaders Where I’d Invest $10,000 for Sustained Performance

Market leaders like Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc (TSX:ATD) are worth an investment.

Read more »