International Evidence for our favorite Value metric: Enterprise Multiples

/International Evidence for our favorite Value metric: Enterprise Multiples

International Evidence for our favorite Value metric: Enterprise Multiples

By | 2017-08-18T17:02:53+00:00 November 24th, 2015|Research Insights, Value Investing Research|5 Comments
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
(Last Updated On: August 18, 2017)

The Enterprise Multiple Investment Strategy: International Evidence

Abstract:

The enterprise multiple (EM) predicts the cross section of international returns. The return predictability of EM is similarly pronounced in developed and emerging markets and likewise strong among small and large firms. An international portfolio of low-EM firms outperforms a portfolio of high-EM firms by about 1% per month. The EM value premium is individually significant for the majority of countries, remains largely unexplained by existing asset pricing models, is robust after controlling for comovement with the respective U.S. premium, and is highly persistent for up to 5 years after portfolio formation, making it a promising strategy for investors.

Alpha Highlight:

Jack and I started work on a paper in 2010 that highlighted the results of a study we conducted to identify the top valuation metric. The results? EBITDA/TEV came out on top. This metric didn’t win all the time, but it seemed to be the most robust over the long-haul. Next, we wrote an entire book dedicated to quantitative value and once again found that enterprise multiples/yields performed the best (specifically EBIT/TEV), and they could be improved through the addition of quality metrics. Finally, we wrote a paper that explored all the value investing metrics posted on the AAII website and found that none of them can reliably beat EBIT/TEV. Sheesh…I’m getting tired just thinking about all the work we’ve done on value metrics…

…But we aren’t the only ones to identify the historical benefits to buying cheap companies based on enterprise multiples. For example, Loughran and Wellman published a paper in the JFQA in 2011, and it it they claim that enterprise multiples are a “strong determinant of stock returns.” And now we have the paper under discussion, which highlights what we’ve known internally for some time now–enterprise multiples have worked in international markets.

Key Findings:

This paper examines 40 non-U.S. countries from 1981 to 2010. The sample includes 22 developed markets and 18 emerging markets. Using the same method as Fama-French, the authors create 6 value-weighted portfolios formed on size and EM. Then they compare the performances of low EM portfolios, high EM portfolios and EMD portfolios (enterprise multiple difference, i.e., low EM portfolios-high EM portfolios, similar to Fama-French’s HML metric)

  • Enterprise value = market value of equity + debt + preferred stock – cash and short-term investments
  • Enterprise Multiple (EM) = EV/EBITDA
The Enterprise Multiple International Evidence

The results are hypothetical results and are NOT an indicator of future results and do NOT represent returns that any investor actually attained. Indexes are unmanaged, do not reflect management or trading fees, and one cannot invest directly in an index. Additional information regarding the construction of these results is available upon request.

Conclusions

A few key points from the paper:

  1. An international portfolio of low-EM firms outperforms a portfolio of high-EM firms by 0.95% per month, with a t-stat of 6.97. What’s more, international EM premiums are 2 times higher than the corresponding U.S. EM premiums studied by Loughran and Wellman (2011).
  2. The EM premiums are significantly positive in all 40 non-US countries. Especially, 18 out of the 22 developed markets have significant t-stat (>2) and 8 out of 18 emerging markets have significant t-stat (>2).
  3. When they rank country EM premiums from high to low, the top 5 developed countries are: Portugal, Australia, Switzerland, Sweden and Austria, and the top 5 emerging markets are: Pakistan, Brazil, Peru, Argentina and Thailand. 

Clearly, the enterprise multiple approach to value investing works well in non-US markets, at least it has done so historically. Investors who believe these results might continue, who want international diversification, and believe in the value anomaly, should look for international value strategies based on enterprise multiples. We have offerings exclusively focused on these metrics, but we encourage readers to study all offerings available.

Appendix

Here is the visual depiction of the results posted above in the table.

The Enterprise Multiple International Evidence_by country

The results are hypothetical results and are NOT an indicator of future results and do NOT represent returns that any investor actually attained. Indexes are unmanaged, do not reflect management or trading fees, and one cannot invest directly in an index. Additional information regarding the construction of these results is available upon request.

 


  • The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Alpha Architect, its affiliates or its employees. Our full disclosures are available here. Definitions of common statistics used in our analysis are available here (towards the bottom).
  • Join thousands of other readers and subscribe to our blog.
  • This site provides NO information on our value ETFs or our momentum ETFs. Please refer to this site.

About the Author:

After serving as a Captain in the United States Marine Corps, Dr. Gray earned a PhD, and worked as a finance professor at Drexel University. Dr. Gray’s interest in bridging the research gap between academia and industry led him to found Alpha Architect, an asset management that delivers affordable active exposures for tax-sensitive investors. Dr. Gray has published four books and a number of academic articles. Wes is a regular contributor to multiple industry outlets, to include the following: Wall Street Journal, Forbes, ETF.com, and the CFA Institute. Dr. Gray earned an MBA and a PhD in finance from the University of Chicago and graduated magna cum laude with a BS from The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
  • Andrew M.

    Has anybody done a study on EM with respect to cross sectional industry or sector performance? Is EM picking up cheap industries or is it really picking up cheap stocks irrespective of industries?

  • industries are typically cheap and the stocks are correlated…so you eat industry concentration when you atttempt to exploit the anomalies…and that is painful for the vast majority of capital in the market. The minute you make life easier for big pools of capital–e.g, sector-neutralize–performance drops on a risk-adjusted basis.

  • Steve

    The consistency is almost crazy, I love it! Nice visual of the table…

  • Hombre Sinombre

    Nice paper, Wes and Jack.

    Does your paper mention the effect of currencies for dollar-based investors? (I am aware, for example, that Japanese yen declines offset gains in the stock market during recent past.) How would the costs of currency hedging affect the portfolio returns if an investor wished to neutralize effects of currency movements, and is there any evidence to support not doing so?

    Thanks for your further thoughts!

    Doug

  • Doug,
    Over the time periods we’ve analyzed FX hedging doesn’t do much. If one considered the frictional costs and brain damage associated with FX hedging the value-add is probably negative. Going forward that may change