P/E will kick in here in couple of Q's 20x-29x for
Post# of 82687
(Total Views: 446)
Posted On: 10/13/2017 4:03:34 PM
P/E will kick in here in couple of Q's 20x-29x for cybersecurity sector. Look at Symantec , negative EPS, trades at a P/E ratio of 29.65
http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/symc/pe-ratio
My preferred way of determining if public companies are cheap or expensive on a relative basis is to look at two key ratios:
1. Enterprise value / forward-year revenue and
2. Price/earnings-to-growth ratio, or PEG , ( using forward-year earnings ).
They also solve two important issues:
1) If you look at some IPOs include companies that are not profitable, making P/E comparison impossible. Therefore, as a first pass, looking at revenue allows you to comp a company like Twitter against its peers. Twitter EV/FY '16 revenue is 21x, and its next closest peer, Yelp, was at 13x. Facebook and LinkedIn trade at an EV/FY '16 of roughly 10x. (Yahoo Finance has EV on its Key Statistics tab and FY revenues on Analyst Estimates.)
2) All earnings are not equal . There are high-growth stocks , like cyber security companies , and the earnings growth is an important factor in comparing peers. PEG Ratio on forward-year earnings adjusts a P/E ratio for growth. If a company trades at a high P/E ratio but is growing really fast, PEG ratio equalizes it and portrays it as less expensive to its slower growing peers.
Growth is very valuable , and PEG adds it to the analysis. Again, you need to make sure to use forward year.
So, getting back to SFOR, it falls under category #2 and growth will be driven by Large scale enterprise contracts ( Ref 10Q) , Licencing it's Technology to both Hardware and software, and recurring revenue from OEM's , Retails and Patent infringement lawsuit money that will add so much to SFOR bottom line , and I think in due time, you will see it falls close to it's peers like Symantec , Norton, McAfee etc and will trade at a much higher level.
http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/symc/pe-ratio
My preferred way of determining if public companies are cheap or expensive on a relative basis is to look at two key ratios:
1. Enterprise value / forward-year revenue and
2. Price/earnings-to-growth ratio, or PEG , ( using forward-year earnings ).
They also solve two important issues:
1) If you look at some IPOs include companies that are not profitable, making P/E comparison impossible. Therefore, as a first pass, looking at revenue allows you to comp a company like Twitter against its peers. Twitter EV/FY '16 revenue is 21x, and its next closest peer, Yelp, was at 13x. Facebook and LinkedIn trade at an EV/FY '16 of roughly 10x. (Yahoo Finance has EV on its Key Statistics tab and FY revenues on Analyst Estimates.)
2) All earnings are not equal . There are high-growth stocks , like cyber security companies , and the earnings growth is an important factor in comparing peers. PEG Ratio on forward-year earnings adjusts a P/E ratio for growth. If a company trades at a high P/E ratio but is growing really fast, PEG ratio equalizes it and portrays it as less expensive to its slower growing peers.
Growth is very valuable , and PEG adds it to the analysis. Again, you need to make sure to use forward year.
So, getting back to SFOR, it falls under category #2 and growth will be driven by Large scale enterprise contracts ( Ref 10Q) , Licencing it's Technology to both Hardware and software, and recurring revenue from OEM's , Retails and Patent infringement lawsuit money that will add so much to SFOR bottom line , and I think in due time, you will see it falls close to it's peers like Symantec , Norton, McAfee etc and will trade at a much higher level.
(4)
(0)