Come whatever event (health crisis, economic bubbles, economic recessions, political events, etc.), there should not be any doubt on business survival.
Earlier it used to be only food companies into this category, but now there are many.
Thread - How to spot a potential multibagger
Multiple fundamental parameters however we cannot be rigid on any of these parameters.
Be flexible to interpret things from bigger picture point of view.
Come whatever event (health crisis, economic bubbles, economic recessions, political events, etc.), there should not be any doubt on business survival.
Earlier it used to be only food companies into this category, but now there are many.
At any point of time, we can think with a certain common sense approach that if management wants, there can be a sustainable growth at any point of time.
Obviously this growth may come thru innovation, optimization, etc.
Management should be forward looking, should be able to read into future to build right growth avenues, should be considerate towards every stakeholder.
In addition management should be ethical & should have good social image too.
There should be a reasonable skin in the game from promoter.
If in case there is a low promoter stake, then promoter should increase stake at every possible opportunity.
Also pledging should either be zero or minimal.
Debt is becoming a dirtier word at individual level as well as at corporate level.
Lower the debt, better the valuations.
Zero debt is the biggest asset.
A company's ability to create value for shareholders is determined by its ability to generate positive cash flows, or more specifically, maximize long-term free cash flow (FCF).
Cash flow is a variable that changes with business phases
Be dynamic
Lesser the equity dilution, better will be the valuations.
Management should avoid the equity dilution at all times.
To improve the liquidity, equity dilution is good sometimes however it should be only when the proportionate growth is visible.
If company is showing earnings of 100 & giving dividend equivalent of just 10 or less, raise more doubts on such companies before building conviction.
It has been a great learning experience based on this parameter.
Thr shd be good dividend policy
More from LearnLifeWealthTravel | Dream Big, Think Growth !!
More from Economy
$600/wk Unemployment Insurance cannot deliver the benefits of a $600/wk Job Guarantee. From the outset, I should say JG is not a replacement for UI, no matter what you may have heard. I’ll get to this later, but read this long 🧶 w/ that in mind.
Automatic stabilization: Both $600/wk UI and JG will provide counter cyclical spending. But UI will be weaker. Counter-cyclical stabilization is not just about the absence of income. It is also about the transmission and structure of economy
Firms don't like to hire the unemployed. Mass and long-term unemployment make the problem worse. JG would recover labor markets much faster than a UI of the same amount, both b/c of the higher direct, induced & tertiary employment effects & b/c of private firm hiring preferences.
JG stabilizes spending patterns better. Uncertain job prospects may mean more cautious spending from the unemployed compared to those w/ guaranteed jobs.
UI is temporary, which makes matters worse. Even if it were permanent, it still won't resolve the problem of job scarcity.
Nations who once achieved tight full employment through active labor market policies demonstrate that unemployment does NOT fluctuate the same way it does w/o them. Direct employment, ELR type policies diminish drastically/even eliminate these amplitudes (eg postwar Japan/Sweden)
Surprised so many smart people bought into the idea that $600/wk UI is the same as $600/wk job guarantee (or better) or that JG jobs must be inherently inessential. I\u2019ve addressed this many times & will post a thread later. Trying not to spend precious family time on Twitter.
— Pavlina R Tcherneva (@ptcherneva) December 29, 2020
Automatic stabilization: Both $600/wk UI and JG will provide counter cyclical spending. But UI will be weaker. Counter-cyclical stabilization is not just about the absence of income. It is also about the transmission and structure of economy
Firms don't like to hire the unemployed. Mass and long-term unemployment make the problem worse. JG would recover labor markets much faster than a UI of the same amount, both b/c of the higher direct, induced & tertiary employment effects & b/c of private firm hiring preferences.
JG stabilizes spending patterns better. Uncertain job prospects may mean more cautious spending from the unemployed compared to those w/ guaranteed jobs.
UI is temporary, which makes matters worse. Even if it were permanent, it still won't resolve the problem of job scarcity.
Nations who once achieved tight full employment through active labor market policies demonstrate that unemployment does NOT fluctuate the same way it does w/o them. Direct employment, ELR type policies diminish drastically/even eliminate these amplitudes (eg postwar Japan/Sweden)
On Jan 6, 2021, the always stellar Mr @deepakshenoy tweeted, this:
https://t.co/fa3GX9VnW0
Innocuous 1 sentence, but its a full economic theory at play.
Let me break it down for you. (1/n)
On September 30, 2020, I wrote an article for @CFASocietyIndia where I explained that RBI is all set to lose its ability to set interest rates if it continues to fiddle with the exchange rate (2/n)
What do I mean, "fiddle with the exchange rate"?
In essence, if RBI opts and continues to manage exchange rate, then that is "fiddling with the exchange rate"
RBI has done that in the past and has restarted it in 2020 - very explicitly. (3/n)
First in March 2020, it opened a Dollar/INR swap of $2B with far leg to be unwound in September 2020.
Implying INR will be bought from the open markets in order to prevent INR from falling vis a vis USD (4/n)
The Second aspect is now, that dollar inflow is happening, and the forex reserves swelled -> implying the rupee is appreciating, RBI again intervened from September, by selling INR in spot markets. (5/n)
https://t.co/9kpWP7ovyM
https://t.co/fa3GX9VnW0
Innocuous 1 sentence, but its a full economic theory at play.
Let me break it down for you. (1/n)
91 day TBills at 3.03%. Interest rates are even lower than RBI has them.
— Deepak Shenoy (@deepakshenoy) January 6, 2021
On September 30, 2020, I wrote an article for @CFASocietyIndia where I explained that RBI is all set to lose its ability to set interest rates if it continues to fiddle with the exchange rate (2/n)
What do I mean, "fiddle with the exchange rate"?
In essence, if RBI opts and continues to manage exchange rate, then that is "fiddling with the exchange rate"
RBI has done that in the past and has restarted it in 2020 - very explicitly. (3/n)
First in March 2020, it opened a Dollar/INR swap of $2B with far leg to be unwound in September 2020.
Implying INR will be bought from the open markets in order to prevent INR from falling vis a vis USD (4/n)
The Second aspect is now, that dollar inflow is happening, and the forex reserves swelled -> implying the rupee is appreciating, RBI again intervened from September, by selling INR in spot markets. (5/n)
https://t.co/9kpWP7ovyM
You May Also Like
1/OK, data mystery time.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
