How We Got Out at the Peak

Value investing tends to outperform in bear markets, though you wouldn't know it from the performance of many value investors last year.

And we fared little better. Yes, our Motley Fool Inside Value newsletter, which focuses exclusively on undervalued stocks, did outperform the market, but we'd rather outperform the market with positive returns.

The truth is that it was nearly impossible last year to make money with a long-only portfolio. Even solid companies that looked reasonably priced based their historical performance, like Vornado (NYSE: VNO  ) , American Eagle (NYSE: AEO  ) , and FedEx (NYSE: FDX  ) , struggled as the slowdown affected almost every sector of the economy.

Nevertheless, several of our picks had solid returns last year, including one that we recommended in 2007. In April 2008 we recommended that our subscribers sell it -- despite it being up 80% from our initial recommendation. And then it started to decline.

We weren't timing the market -- we were just being disciplined value investors. That can not only make you money, but also help you keep it. And that's critical in a market like this one.

Let me tell you how we did it.

The business
The stock was Cimarex Energy (NYSE: XEC  ) , a mid-cap natural gas and oil producer with wells in the southwest United States and the Gulf of Mexico. When we recommended it, the company had 1.4 trillion cubic feet equivalent (tcfe) of proven reserves, making it a solid, but not huge, player in the industry.

Almost all of our Inside Value picks have strong market positions, so it's noteworthy that Cimarex had relatively few competitive advantages. Cimarex's revenue was almost entirely dependent on oil and natural gas prices, and its main competitive advantage was that all its production was U.S.-based, which reduced political risks and kept its production close to its primary markets.

What we liked
Why would we recommend a company with only mild competitive advantages in a commodity business? Because the stock had a shareholder-friendly management, a solid balance sheet, and a cheap price tag.

Many oil and gas companies spend their capital increasing proven reserves; they consider generating cash simply an afterthought. Not so for Cimarex, where management focused on allocating capital to the highest-return projects. As a result, Cimarex generated almost $9 per share in cash flow in 2006, which was a lot, considering the shares were trading in the mid-$30s.

What's more, the company wasn't using massive leverage to achieve that cash flow. The balance sheet only had $400 million in debt -- a conservative amount for a business that had almost $900 million in cash from operations. A company with these characteristics could handle rough times.

Bargain bin
What's more, every way we looked at it, the company was cheap. Cimarex was trading at a ratio of enterprise value to mcfe of proven reserves of $2.45. In the preceding year, Devon Energy (NYSE: DVN  ) , EXCO Resources (NYSE: XCO  ) , and Anadarko (NYSE: APC  ) all made acquisitions at prices greater than $3.50 per mcfe of proven reserves. By that measure, Cimarex was trading at about 68% of its fair value.

We also looked at Cimarex using our own models. If long-term gas prices averaged $6.50 per mcfe and oil prices averaged $60 per barrel, we thought the stock was worth about $52, which made $35 an attractive entry point. What's more, in a world worried about peak oil, these estimates seemed conservative. A $1 increase in natural gas prices would increase our estimate of the value of the shares by $15.

In combination, these factors implied that shares had good upside potential if natural gas spiked, yet were relatively low risk if natural gas prices remained weak.

The outcome
The stock rose 21% between our recommendation and the end of 2007 -- and then natural gas began an ascent, eventually surpassing $13. Cimarex followed. With natural gas prices so high, the company was raking in the cash.

And we recommended that our subscribers get out.

It might seem counterintuitive that we recommended a sell when natural gas prices were high and the future seemed bright. But we got out because we adhere to strict value investing criteria.

Cimarex didn't appear to have any particular advantages in growing its future production, and we saw no reason why natural gas prices deserved to be substantially higher than our long-term estimate of $6.50 per mcfe. In other words, we couldn't conservatively value Cimarex at substantially more than our original $52 estimate -- but the stock was selling for $63.

We got out just before the stock started falling. Because of that decision, we avoided Cimarex's recent descent below $25.

The Foolish bottom line
Part of being a value investor is investing defensively. We don't want to lose money, and that means not just buying when a stock is undervalued, but also selling when a stock is overvalued. This strategy helps you hold on to your profits and provides cash to invest in other undervalued stocks -- all without trying to time the market.

The opportunities present in the market today are far more compelling than they were when we recommended Cimarex. For instance, we've identified an energy company that shares many of Cimarex's attributes -- but while Cimarex was trading at 68% of its fair value when we recommended it, this stock is trading at only 28%.

We think the potential upside is huge. If you'd like to learn more, just click here for a free, 30-day trial to Inside Value. You can read all about it -- as well as all about all of our other recommendations -- and there's no obligation to subscribe.

Before he became an investor, Fool contributor Richard Gibbons always thought gas was rather unattractive. He owns shares, calls, and is short puts on Inside Value's other energy pick. FedEx is a Motley Fool Stock Advisor choice. The Motley Fool owns shares of American Eagle Outfitters. The Fool's disclosure policy likes to move it, move it.


Read/Post Comments (8) | Recommend This Article (42)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On January 26, 2009, at 8:04 PM, kayakmastr wrote:

    Your analysis is relevant to deciding when to sell one stock. But did your whole portfolio get out at the peak? Deciding when to bail out of an entire portfolio is much more difficult. And the recent plunge in stock prices, certainly highlights the importance of thinking about such things.

  • Report this Comment On January 26, 2009, at 9:54 PM, drstocks1 wrote:

    With as many losers as your portifolio contains, it seems inappropriate to brag about one properly timed exit. Having been deluged with your request to join a new service Im wondering whether those of us who are following the stock advisor service are the real fools. If I was running this service Id have opened up the new tool box to all faithful subscribers for 6 months to allow them to validate your new service and then discount their current subscriptions when adding the pro service.

  • Report this Comment On January 26, 2009, at 11:42 PM, Notfooled1 wrote:

    You may have hit one stock right, but your portfolio was a total loser for 2008. Better "luck" in 2009 because I don't see a lot of skill here.

  • Report this Comment On January 27, 2009, at 12:12 AM, trenton1ryan wrote:

    These guys are right. This is an interesting article, but it's just one stock. What about the rest??

    Even being right about 50% of your picks (on when to get out) would be admirable imo, but that's not the case, is it??

  • Report this Comment On January 27, 2009, at 1:12 AM, SnapDave wrote:

    Richard,

    You set yourself up with that title. I was expecting some self deprecating humor about newsletter performance. It was actually a very good article – and I’m not usually impressed by your articles.

  • Report this Comment On January 27, 2009, at 4:13 AM, tykundegex wrote:

    Give the Fools some credit -- this article is about one stock they got OUT of. The other losers in their portfolio from 2008 (which we all have) are still IN their portfolio. The advice, which is about why and when to sell, is valid.

  • Report this Comment On January 27, 2009, at 4:31 AM, citation5pilot wrote:

    When I signed up, I didn't realize that I would be getting hit day after day for dditional sign-ups. Certainly, these articles give us something to think about. But, you have to be very careful about following recommendations from the Fool like Strayer Education.

    The fool hyped up Strayer, then after I believe about 2 months, bailed out. Be Careful folloiwng any of this.

  • Report this Comment On January 27, 2009, at 9:17 AM, fks3 wrote:

    I'm and "old guy" and a long-term investor. I have to laugh at the "you shoulda got out" comments in response to most TMF posts these days.

    Fact: No one can time the market. Yes, there have been "gurus" each decade that call the bottom and the peak but they are always wrong in the next market cycle; they're not smarter than everyone else, just luckier in the short-term. Also, no one always picks winners. Lynch at Fidelity, the best there was, lost on 3 out of 10 stocks.

    You people obviously expect the impossible from your investment advisors. If your market horizon is this short you have no business in stocks. Invest in CD's and T-Bills and "go broke safely" as inflation and taxes outpace your "investments".

    The tide has gone out and all boats have been lowered. The tide will surely come in again, and most boats will rise. If you don't have a 5+ year investment horizon (10+ now that the government has the "fix" in), and can't stomach corrections, stocks are not for you.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 816823, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 10/25/2014 9:05:29 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated 11 hours ago Sponsored by:
DOW 16,805.41 127.51 0.76%
S&P 500 1,964.58 13.76 0.71%
NASD 4,483.72 30.92 0.69%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

10/24/2014 4:00 PM
AEO $12.92 Down -0.88 -6.38%
American Eagle Out… CAPS Rating: ***
APC $90.98 Down -1.19 -1.29%
Anadarko Petroleum… CAPS Rating: *****
DVN $59.91 Down -0.10 -0.17%
Devon Energy CAPS Rating: ****
FDX $163.88 Up +1.38 +0.85%
FedEx CAPS Rating: ****
VNO $107.42 Down -0.14 -0.13%
Vornado Realty Tru… CAPS Rating: *
XCO $2.79 Down -0.01 -0.36%
EXCO Resources, In… CAPS Rating: ***
XEC $109.16 Down -2.07 -1.86%
Cimarex Energy CAPS Rating: ***

Advertisement