We have since mined Conoco's 10-Q financial statements to update the metrics we use to assess Cash Management, Growth, Profitability and Value. This post reports on these metrics and the Financial Gauge scores.
In summary, Conoco's latest GCFR gauge scores are as follows:
- Cash Management: 10 of 25 (down from 12 in March)
- Growth: 0 of 25 (down from 9)
- Profitability: 6 of 25 (down from 8)
- Value: 8 of 25 (down from 12)
- Overall: 27 of 100 (down from 44)
The current and historical values for the financial metrics that determine the gauge scores are listed below, with some brief commentary.
| Cash Management | Jun 2009 | Mar 2009 | Jun 2008 | 5-Yr Avg |
| Current Ratio | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| LTD/Equity | 49.1% | 52.1% | 23.3% | 30.4% |
| Debt/CFO (years) | 2.0 | 1.6 | 0.9 | 1.1 |
| Inventory/CGS (days) | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Finished Goods/Inventory | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Days of Sales Outstanding (days) | 33.3 | 23.1 | 28.2 | 23.6 |
| Working Capital/Invested Capital | 0.0% | -0.1% | -1.2% | -1.3% |
| Cash Conversion Cycle Time (days) | -1.2 | -0.1 | -1.6 | 0.9 |
| Gauge Score (0 to 25) | 10 | 12 | 10 | 11 |
Conoco is clearly able to run its business with a Current Ratio of 1.0, which we would consider too low for a smaller firm. With Current Assets more or less equal to Current Liabilities, Working Capital, in the sense we use, it roughly zero.
In the fourth quarter of 2008, Conoco increased its long-term debt from $22 billion to $27 billion, and the balance is now about $29 billion. At about the same time, intangible asset impairment charges totaling $35 billion eliminated about 40 percent of Shareholders' Equity. The combination of these actions explains the rise in Long-term Debt to Equity, relative to last year's level.
The increase in Days Sales Outstanding looks more like a temporary aberration, resulting from the huge Revenue decline, than any particular problem with receivables.
| Growth | Jun 2009 | Mar 2009 | Jun 2008 | 5-Yr Avg |
| Revenue growth | -19.7% | 7.8% | 26.2% | 7.9% |
| Revenue/Assets | 106.2% | 132.7% | 124.7% | 131.0% |
| Operating Profit growth | -5.7% | 6.4% | 19.0% | 9.7% |
| CFO growth | -39.5% | -26.0% | 6.0% | 7.3% |
| Net Income growth | N/A | N/A | 61.0% | 103.9% |
| Gauge Score (0 to 25) | 0 | 9 | 21 | 14 |
The Operating Profit rate is the annualized rate of growth in Operating Profit after Taxes over the last 16 quarters.
The big drop in energy prices since the middle of 2008 has, of course, negatively affected Revenue. The limited oil-price recovery in the second quarter helped with comparisons to the first quarter, but not with the second quarter of last year.
Cash Flow has fallen precipitously, and GAAP Net Income growth is N/A because the company recorded a huge loss in 2008.
The decline in Revenue/Assets would have been greater if last year's impairment charges had not reduced Total Assets by about 20 percent.
| Profitability | Jun 2009 | Mar 2009 | Jun 2008 | 5-Yr Avg |
| Operating Expenses/Revenue | 91.0% | 89.4% | 88.6% | 88.6% |
| ROIC | 9.7% | 14.2% | 13.3% | 13.5% |
| Free Cash Flow/Invested Capital | -2.8% | -0.7% | 10.7% | 6.0% |
| Accrual Ratio | -15.2% | -14.5% | 2.3% | 1.6% |
| Gauge Score (0 to 25) | 6 | 8 | 9 | 9 |
The first quarter's improved Gross Margin limited the growth in the Operating Expense ratio when Revenue declined. However, the margin (including the refining margin) was less profitable in the second quarter, causing the rise in the Operating Expense ratio and, secondarily, in the lower ROIC.
The much lower Accrual Ratio would ordinarily be interpreted as a signal of higher quality earnings. However, it's more a result of last year's non-cash charges, which hit Net Income but not Cash Flow.
| Value | Jun 2009 | Mar 2009 | Jun 2008 | 5-Yr Avg |
| P/E | N/A | N/A | 8.3 | 8.2 |
| P/E vs. S&P 500 P/E | N/A | N/A | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| PEG | N/A | 10.0 | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Price/Revenue | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.5 |
| Enterprise Value/Cash Flow (EV/CFO) | 6.1 | 4.9 | 6.7 | 6.5 |
| Gauge Score (0 to 25) | 8 | 12 | 2 | 7 |
The price of ConocoPhillips shares rose 7.4 percent, from $39.16 to $42.06, in the second quarter. However, since GAAP earnings were hugely negative in the fourth quarter of 2008, we don't learn anything from our normal trailing-year Price/Earnings ratio.
If we back out $35 billion in fourth-quarter 2008 charges, the P/E multiple, on a trailing-twelve-months basis, would be about 6.3. This figure is a small fraction of current S&P 500 multiple, and the PEG ratio would be a tiny 0.3.
Conoco's valuation ratios can be compared with other companies in the Major Integrated Oil and Gas industry.
| Overall | Jun 2009 | Mar 2009 | Jun 2008 | 5-Yr Avg |
| Gauge Score (0 to 100) | 27 | 44 | 30 | 36 |
Conoco's gauge scores are down across the board, which reflects the effects of lower energy prices and refining margins on the company's Revenue, Earnings, and Cash Flows. Comparisons with prior periods are made more difficult by Conoco's decision in 2008 to mark down the value of its intangible assets and investments by approximately $35 billion (about 19 percent of total assets.) Although the company moved up a notch in the Fortune 500 list, Shareholders have much less Equity.
Full disclosure: Long COP at time of writing
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment