The Estimates Game

This is from the Knowledgebase but I thought I should repost it in light of the recent fiascos with Twilio, The Trade Desk, Okta, etc. I exaggerate a little for the clarity of the message, but what I am saying is essentially all true. I hope you find these ideas useful:

The earnings and revenues estimate game that the analysts play has put the company CFO’s, who give the outlooks, in a no-win situation. Here’s how it has come to work over time: It doesn’t seem to make any difference how good or bad the actual results are, whether they are up 3%, or 30%, or 70%, or more. The only thing that the headlines pick up is whether the earnings beat or missed analysts’ estimates. (Who cares???)

For example, a company whose earnings are up just 3%, but beats estimates by a nickel, will get screaming headlines. The headlines won’t say “ABC earnings only up 3%!” No, the headlines will say “ABC beats estimates!” The price will undoubtedly rise.

On the other hand, a company whose earnings are up 70%, but misses estimates by three cents, will get equally screaming headlines, not saying “DEF earnings up an amazing 70%”, but saying “DEF misses estimates!!!” The price will undoubtedly fall.

The whole estimates game is only about whether the earnings and revenue beat or miss a number that some analysts have picked. It totally ignores the question of how well the company is actually doing, and how good (or bad) the revenues and earnings really are.

However, the companies aren’t stupid. They have figured this out. And they have started to give lower and lower estimates for their next quarter, picking numbers that they are almost certain to beat (by a lot). They don’t want the bad publicity of missing analyst estimates. (Again, who cares!!!)

So what happens? The companies give low estimates and the analysts say “Good earnings, but disappointing estimates for the next quarter. We’re downgrading them from a buy to a hold.”

Thus the companies are screwed whatever they do. If they estimate high, where they think they will be, and miss, they get the “missed estimates” headlines, and if they estimate low, to let themselves beat estimates handily, they get the “disappointing estimates” headline. They lose either way.

How do we as investors deal with this puzzle? Think “How is this company doing? How much are earnings and revenues actually up?” What matters to me is that the company is growing earnings at 50%, and if the company sells off because of an “earnings miss” (which is a ridiculous term for a company increasing earnings by 50%, if you think about it), I might take advantage of it by adding to my position.

I base my purchase decisions on how well the company is doing, and my evaluation of how it will do in the future, and how well its price matches its prospects, rather than whether the company came in two cents above, or two cents below, what the analysts predicted.

Saul

A link to the Knowledgebase for this board is at the top of the Announcements panel that is on the right side of every page on this board.

For some additions to the Knowledgebase, bringing it up to date, I’d advise reading several other posts linked to on the panel, especially “How I Pick a Company to Invest In,” and “Why My Investing Criteria Have Changed,” and “Why It Really is Different.”

96 Likes

SaulR80683
Sorry, you can only recommend a post to the Best of once.

This is from the Knowledgebase but I thought I should repost it in light of the recent fiascos with Twilio, The Trade Desk, Okta, etc. I exaggerate a little for the clarity of the message, but what I am saying is essentially all true. I hope you find these ideas useful

Clarity of thought and succinct explanation is so refreshing. I really enjoy (and benefit from) reading this site!

4 Likes

I base my purchase decisions on how well the company is doing, and my evaluation of how it will do in the future, and how well its price matches its prospects, rather than whether the company came in two cents above, or two cents below, what the analysts predicted.

While I agree about basing purchase decisions on how well the company is doing, the company should focus on providing “accurate” range of estimates, that may include the low ball, but the upper end of the range should be closer to where they think they will be.

In the end, since it is a no-win scenario with analysts that want to “force” a “negative” headline, it doesn’t matter short term price movements based on missing an analyst estimate. Generally, the price is going to be based on a combination of how a company is doing and how it is projected to do in the near term. The price may fall based on missing a “high-ball” estimate being missed, but it also would have risen based on that same estimate.

What growth and when it ends are key to a current valuation/price. At some point growth will begin to slow. The key to investing is not paying too much for future growth based on historical growth and projected growth estimates.

I don’t think I’m saying anything not already known and understood, and some of this could be in the Knowledgebase posts.

I have enjoyed reading a lot of the information provided here…wish I had found this forum earlier.

JI.

1 Like

The earnings and revenues estimate game that the analysts play has put the company CFO’s, who give the outlooks, in a no-win situation. Here’s how it has come to work over time: It doesn’t seem to make any difference how good or bad the actual results are, whether they are up 3%, or 30%, or 70%, or more. The only thing that the headlines pick up is whether the earnings beat or missed analysts’ estimates. (Who cares???)

I’m not going to defend the estimates game and I 100% agree that we should be looking at medium to long term only how well a company is growing, etc.

But…
I can understand, a little, how and why this happens. In theory, as the earnings date approaches the stock price reflects the value for the average of the earnings. If earnings match this and the outlook is for the same, then the short term price should stay the same. But if earnings and/or outlook is better the the price will bump up…likewise down. This is mostly noise with the actual long term growth and margins being more important…however the estimates, generally, predate the actual earnings.

Mike

Well said!

I would just add a simple methodology that make earnings forecasts more useful with high growth stocks:

  1. Calculate the average of the recent earnings “beats” of the particular company - just last quarter is fine, but four quarter average is probably ideal. On average I’d say the companies in most portfolios I have seen on the board beat by 5-15% on average.

  2. Apply this average to the new estimate to the current quarter / year guidance (year is a bit trickier as it can depend on how many quarters are left in the year + most companies both beat in current quarter and raise the year even more than the beat)

  3. Use this uplifted number as a reference point for next earnings and to judge if you think the growth profile going forward is still on track with your thesis.

This methodology can’t be assumed to always work (if we hit a recession things will be vastly different) but it’s a good rough guide to make sure you haven’t gotten ahead of yourself in your forecast and to see how the company executes. Also it is much more applicable to SaaS companies - as we’ve seen with HW companies it is much more volatile and the guidance “game” is much less pronounced.

It’s also meaningful to track if a companies beat % is shrinking over time. For example, NTNX beat by only 1-2% two quarters ago and then just scrapped by with hitting guidance last quarter. It shows the business isn’t as strong as they thought (assuming they lowballed a bit as smart management will do). As a result, they may have taken short term measures to make a number that could hurt future growth (deplete backlog in a HW company or pull in orders for example). I’m sure this is what happened with their low guidance. They are trying to reset to a number they can hit after scrapping up all they could to hit last quarter - however as outlined in other posts, even if they are trying to reset and be able to beat by 10%+ the growth is still much lower that we previously thought.

Erik

4 Likes

Some companies will not provide guidance, right? Isn’t that a way to avoid the estimates game and let the company results speak for themselves?

JK

1 Like

Some companies will not provide guidance, right? Isn’t that a way to avoid the estimates game and let the company results speak for themselves?

Not giving guidance only serves to allow analysts free reign on what the future holds, and the company doesn’t offer any check.

The estimates game will be played with or without the aid of company guidance…

JI

I clearly understood what Saul was saying and it will benefit my journey. All the me-too replies put me to sleep.

This is not always the case.

Do the analysts factor in company guidance with their estimates? Wondering if company guidance is not provided, then analyst estimates would perhaps not get so far afield and be more based on more realistic and accurate expectations? Thoughts along these lines?

John

The only thing that the headlines pick up is whether the earnings beat or missed analysts’ estimates. (Who cares???)

Louis Navellier, for one, cares very much. He is more trader than investor but quite successful. He uses “What is Working on Wall Street Now?” which is a series of screens he updates quarterly (monthly?) to find which screen is working best now. The screens are not all equal weight, “Earnings Surprises” is very highly valued.

“louis navellier” “earnings surprise”
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q…

BTW, I used his MPT Review at the close of the century and did very well. Unfortunately he is a master at doublespeak and after he explains things in fine detail you still have learned nothing!

Denny Schlesinger

5 Likes

I learned early into investing that “analyst” input is mostly just noise. I’m still constantly amazed at how the market reacts because Jim Bob analyst randomly downgrades stock for a well performing company.

I also see the silliness in all of this as an opportunity for well informed investors. How often are companies discussed here getting whacked after “missing estimates” while still growing at 50% and there are multiple posts about using the drop as a buying opportunity. I personally love that the herd mentality is constantly wrong. If they weren’t it would be a lot harder to make money investing.