Originally Posted by
BlackPeter
Good question. I assume you want me to compare that with IFT?
So, lets take backward PE and backwards earnings CAGR ... this way we don't need to rely on analyst forecasts.
And as well - these numbers don't really describe the future, unless we assume that the next 10 years will be like the last 10 .... and, while FPH, MFT and as well IFT are no doubt quality companies (which does not mean that they are currently cheap or good value), not sure I'd put ATM into the same category.
But anyway - here we go:
FPH: PE (10yr backwards) 57.2 Earnings CAGR 12.2
MFT: PE (10yr backwards) 39.4 Earnings CAGR 20.4
ATM: PE (10yr backwards) 31.5 Earnings CAGR 41.3
IFT: PE (10yr backwards) 20.3 Earnings CAGR 23.2
Taking these numbers at face value does IFT look really good, doesn't it?
What the numbers don't tell you is that only MFT and FPH managed to continuously and sustainably grow their EPS (MFT from from 66 cents in 2013 to $ 4.24 in 2023, FPH from 14 cents in 2013 to 43 cents in 2023). They are the members of this group which I would assess based on these two parameters (obviously not just), and FPH clearly looks based on them currently dear. MFT on the other hand I hold quite a lot.
ATM has a great CAGR based on starting the "competition" in 2013 with only 1 cent EPS (which makes it easy to get huge growth rates) ... and hey, clearly their sales channel disaster changed their future earnings potential.
... and IFT's EPS year on year jumps around like a rabid dog ... sure - some years they have amazing earnings (when they just sold out one of their speculation objects), and in other years their EPS is close to zero. Monte Carlo?
Unless you are sure that the board keeps being really lucky with selling their assets, I would not buy them based on these numbers.
So - yes, good question, but for two out of the four competitors (and IFT is one of them) you clearly need to look at other parameters as well.