Clifford G. Dow, CFA, CFP®, ChFC
Chartered Financial Analyst
Certified Financial Planner™
Chartered Financial Consultant
The rankings are produced primarily by a computer program using as input the earnings and price history. The system tends to assign high ranks to stocks with low price-earnings ratios relative to historic norms and to the current price-earnings ratio on the market. The system also tends to assign high ranks to stocks whose quarterly earnings reports show an upward momentum, relative to the quarterly earnings on the market as a whole, and to stocks that have upward price momentum. These factors are weighted by the computer program. The weights used on the different factors are chosen by doing a cross-sectional regression on past data. The set of weights that seems to give the best predictive ability is then chosen. In sum, the one-year rankings are based on growth in earnings, price momentum, and the price-earnings ratio of each stock relative to the market and to historical standards for that stock.
Standard & Poor’s says of its “quality” ratings the following:
The point of departure in arriving at these rankings is a computerized scoring system based on per-share earnings and dividend records of the most recent ten years – a period deemed long enough to measure significant time segments of secular growth, to capture indications of basic change in trend as they develop, and to encompass the full peak-to-peak range of the business cycle. Basic scores are computed for earnings and dividends, then adjusted as indicated by a set of predetermined modifiers for growth, stability within long-term trend, and cyclicality. Adjusted scores for earnings and dividends are then combined to yield a final score.
A ranking is not a forecast of future market price performance, but is basically an appraisal of past performance of earnings and dividends, and relative current standing. These rankings must not be used as market recommendations; a high-score stock may at times be so overpriced as to justify its sale, while a low-score stock may be attractively priced for purchase. Rankings based upon earnings and dividend records are no substitute for complete analysis. They cannot take into account potential effects of management changes, internal company policies not yet fully reflected in the earnings and dividend record, public relations standing, recent competitive shifts, and a host of other factors that may be relevant to investment status and decision.
With respect to these two rating systems, it is useful to note the following:
- These are largely objective and statistical rating systems. They involve almost no subjective input by individual analysts.
- They are relative rating systems. While a stock with a good rating is expected to deliver a good performance in a good market, it may be expected to deliver no more than a “less bad” performance in a bad market.
- While the Standard & Poor’s quality rating is of only marginal value as a prognosticator of potential future appreciation, the Value Line timeliness rating is of only marginal value as a measure of quality. Together, however, the two ratings make a good pair. While the Value Line rating provides an indication of how a stock might perform in the marketplace if things go as expected, the Standard & Poor’s rating provides us with a measure of our potential for misery if the Value Line rating fails us.
- The interpretation of why the current ratings are what they are, and the probable duration of the circumstances responsible for the current ratings are, for the most part, left to the resources of the rest of us.
Clifford G. Dow, CFA, CFP®, ChFC
Chartered Financial Analyst
Certified Financial Planner™
Chartered Financial Consultant