An odd lot is a securities trade made for less than the normal trading unit. If you are talking about stocks, an odd lot would generally be a trade of less than 100 shares. The number differs for other types of securities, though. In some cases, because of the size of the order, odd lot orders can have a higher commission. These are also occasionally called a broken lot or an uneven lot. If a trader is buying or selling an odd lot, it probably means that they have limited funds to invest.
In these modern times of electronic trading and credit default swaps, it sometimes feels hard for the average person to figure out where the economy is going. There are a number of economic indicators that the average person can try to wrap their head around, such as international trade and construction spending. Well, in Alan Greenspan‘s book “The Age of Turbulence”, he talks about a slightly unconventional indicator: The Men’s Underwear Index. Greenspan says that men tend not to replace their underpants when they have a forward impression that trouble is coming. His reasoning is that the sales of such a necessity fluctuate the least among all apparels, so even the slightest change in numbers can be revealing.
So, how accurate is the Men’s Underwear Index (MUI)? I went looking for a publicly traded men’s underwear company and the only one that I could come up with was Hanes. My thought was that stock price should indicate sales success. Below is a comparison of Hanesbrands Inc. vs the S&P 500 vs the Dow Jones.
They appear to be follow similar patterns but I’m not sure if this particular chart shows that Hanes is predicting a move in the market. It looks more like it is moving with the market. How about if we look at their 2011 sales figures. In early Q1 2011, net sales went up 12%. In Q2 2011, net sales went up 14%. How does that compare to unemployment levels? If you look at the below chart, it looks like unemployment has plateaued, but only after sharply increasing.
I get the impression that the Men’s Underwear Index might be an indicator of the consumer’s confidence in the economy but it isn’t a very good one. Maybe economists should stick with something else. 🙂
A business can have a number of different possible capital structures. A firm’s capital structure is defined as “mix of a company’s long-term debt, specific short-term debt, common equity and preferred equity.(source)” In the paper “The Cost of Capital, Corporation Finance and the Theory of Investment”, Franco Modigliani and Merton Miller stated that if you consider two firms which are identical except for their financial structures, with one firm being unlevered and the other being levered, the two firms would have the same value (). According to the third edition of Corporate Finance: Core Principles & Applications, this means that a firm cannot change the total value of its outstanding securities by changing the proportions of its capital structure, or in other words, no capital structure is any better or worse than any other capital structure for the firm’s stockholders. This is known as MM Proposition I. The assumptions that they make, in order to come to their conclusion are that individuals can borrow as cheaply as corporations and that there are no transaction costs. It also discards the effect of taxes.
If you are like me, you might be asking yourself, at this point, what about the effect of risk? A levered company, by default is more risky than an unlevered company. In MM Proposition II, Modigliani and Miller argue that the risk to equity holders increases with leverage. In MM Proposition II, we are still ignoring taxes. Remember when we looked at the Weighted Average Cost of Capital, last week? Well, we are going to use it again.
We defined . This week, we are ignoring . In order to determine the cost of equity (), we use the formula:
= Cost of equity
= Cost of capital for an all-equity firm
= Cost of debt
= Value of the firm’s debt or bonds
= Value of the firm’s stock or equity
According to the third edition of Corporate Finance: Core Principles & Applications, the cost of equity capital , will be positively related to the firm’s debt-equity ratio and the firm’s WACC will be invariant tot he firm’s debt-equity ratio.
Using the cost of equity number, in a number of simulations can help a company determine the effects of taking on additional debt capital.
As a quick programming note, before I end this post, I have turned on comments on the blog. If you would like to be part of a discussion surrounding these posts, feel free. I would love to hear your thoughts.
We are a few weeks into the series of finance-related posts. I figured I would explain this series a little before we go into today’s topic. I am currently working on an Masters of Business Administration at Cardinal Stritch University, in Glendale, WI. As I go through my homework, I often find that the textbook is not the best in the world and I have to pull concepts from a number of source. With this content, I try to develop a reasonable narrative that pulls things together. When I blog a topic like today’s topic, it’s my highly public way of doing that. I hope it helps someone else out there.
Today, we’re going to talk a little about the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC). According to the third edition of Corporate Finance: Core Principles & Applications, “the WACC is the minimum return a company needs to satisfy all of its investors, including stockholders, bondholders, and preferred stockholders.” According to investopedia, “all else being equal, the WACC of a firm increases as the beta and rate of return on equity increases, as an increase in WACC notes a decrease in valuation and a higher risk.”
So, essentially the WACC is the amount of profit that the firm has to earn, in order to satisfy all of its obligations and if the firm starts to look like a worse investment, they will need to earn more profit. The formula for the WACC (according to investopedia) is:
= cost of equity
= cost of debt
= the market value of the firm’s equity
= the market value of the firm’s debt
= percentage of financing that is equity
= percent of financing that is debt
= the corporate tax rate
So, let’s look at a small example problem. Let’s say that a firm has a cost of debt of 5.2% and a cost of equity of 9.1%. Let’s also say that the corporate tax rate is 39% and the firm’s debt-equity ratio is 0.6. How would you figure out the firm’s WACC?
5.2% implies 5.2 parts debt for 10 parts equity and because the value is equal to the sum of debt plus the equity, the debt-value ratio is . The equity-value ratio would then be .
So, now that we know what the WACC is and how it’s calculated, is there an easy way to find the WACC for a publicly traded company? Well, for better or worse, there is apparently an app for that. 🙂
According to investopedia, a normal distribution is “a probability distribution that plots all of its values in a symmetrical fashion and most of the results are situated around the probability’s mean”. If a firm’s returns are normally distributed, it means that if you create a histogram of a company’s returns, over a larger period of time, the histogram would take a bell shape, centered on the mean return.
If a stock’s return is normally distributed, it means that 68.26% chance that a return will be within one standard deviation () from the mean. There is a 95.44% chance that the return will be within two standard deviations from the mean and a 99.74% chance that it will be within three standard deviations from the mean.
Two weeks ago, we learned about a company’s beta. Last week, we used the company’s beta when we learned about the capital asset pricing model. This week, we are going to take things a little further. In today’s post, we are going to be talking about the cost of equity.
Investopedia states that “a firm’s cost of equity represents the compensation that the market demands in exchange for owning the asset and bearing the risk of ownership.” Traditionally, you would calculate the cost of equity using the dividend capitalization model but what if the firm you are studying does not pay dividends? We can still use our capital asset pricing model to get the cost of capital.
If the firm that you are studying doesn’t offer a dividend, what else will it do with the money? It will invest it in a project and use the profits for future dividends or future investment in other projects. If you put yourself in the shoes of the investor, they could invest in something that pays an immediate dividend and reinvest the dividend in something else. Alternatively, they could invest in something that doesn’t pay an immediate dividend but pays one down the road. They are going to want to invest in the option that pays the most, though. This means that the investor will be happy if the new project pays more than a security of comparable risk would pay.
According to the third edition of Corporate Finance: Core Principles & Applications, “the discount rate of a project should be the expected return on a financial asset of comparable risk.”
The Cost of Equity can be estimated as
Where is the risk-free rate, is the market risk premium, and is the stock beta.
This assumes that the stock’s beta is the same as the project’s beta and the firm has no debt. If the assumptions are not true, the above equation would need to be adjusted.
Let’s look at a quick example. The risk-free rate of return is typically equal to the United States three-month Treasury bill rate. As of writing this, it is 0%. Lets say that the firm has a beta of 1.2 and that the new project has the same risk as the rest of the firm. Lets also say that the market risk premium equals 7%.
The cost of equity would be:
According to the third edition of Corporate Finance: Core Principles & Applications, almost three-fourths of U.S. companies use the CAPM in capital budgeting.
Last week, we talked about what a company’s beta is. I figured that this week, we would learn about the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM). According to Investopedia, the CAPM is “a model that describes the relationship between risk and expected return and that is used in the pricing of risky securities.”
According to the third edition of Corporate Finance: Core Principles & Applications, the CAPM “implies that the expected return on a security is linearly to its beta.”
is the Expect Return on a Security
is the Risk-free rate
is the Beta of the security
is the Expected return on market
In the above graph, the Security Market Line is the depiction of the actual CAPM. Lets try an example. If the risk-free rate is 1%, the of the security is 1.2, and the expected market return on the market is 11%, then stock should return 13%.
This is a topic that I recently dealt with within an assignment for class. Investopedia defines a company’s beta as “a measure of the volatility, or systematic risk, of a security or a portfolio in comparison to the market as a whole.”
According to the third edition of Corporate Finance: Core Principles & Applications, when you graph the return on the particular security on theY axis and the return on the market on the X axis, the slope of the line is the Beta.
A beta of 1.21 would mean that for every 1% that the market moves, the company would move 1.21%. A high beta would mean that the company is risky. If the return on the market goes down at all, the return on the security goes down much faster.
Chances are, you will not find a stock with a negative beta but it would mean that the return goes up when the return on the market goes down.
If the beta is zero, it means that the market has no influence at all on the security.
If a security has a beta of one, it means that the return moves with the fund. An example could be an index fund.
If the security has a beta greater than one, the security is more volatile than the market.
How do you find a company’s beta? One way is to go to finance.yahoo.com and look under key statistics. If you prefer to you Google Finance, the same number is listed at the top of the page, next to the stock quote.