What Investors Don’t Get About Netflix

Netflix may be one of the most divisive stock in the market today. However, I think there may be some aspects of the company the bears are overlooking.

As one of the best performing stock of the 2010s, it is no surprise that Netflix is also one of the most talked-about stocks on the internet. But despite the seemingly endless discussions online, I still think there are some aspects of the company that some investors may be overlooking.

I want to discuss these aspects in this article.

#1 There is a clear path to positive free cash flow generation

Netflix had a negative free cash flow of US$3.5 billion in 2019, extending a streak of eight years of increasing cash burn. This burn rate certainly cannot go on forever and it is what’s putting many investors off. The negative free cash flow is even more alarming when you add the fact that the company is in a net debt position of around US$9 .7billion.

However, Netflix’s high cash burn rate may soon be a thing of the past. Netflix’s CEO, Reed Hastings, believes a turnaround is on the cards. In its most recent 2019 fourth-quarter shareholder letter, Netflix said:

“For the full year, FCF was -$3.3 billion which we believe is the peak in our annual FCF deficit. Our plan is to continually improve FCF each year and to move slowly toward FCF positive. For 2020, we currently forecast FCF of approximately -$2.5 billion… With our FCF profile improving, this means that over time we’ll be less reliant on public markets and will be able to fund more of our investment needs organically through our growing operating profits.”

I think management’s confidence is entirely warranted. Let’s break it down. The majority of the cash Netflix is spending is for the licensing and production of content. In 2019, Netflix spent US$14.6 billion on streaming content, meaning around 75% of its US$20 billion in revenue was spent on content alone.

To improve its free cash flow metric, Netflix needs to spend much less as a percentage of its revenue. And I think its entirely possible that this scenario will play out sooner rather than later. 

The math is simple. 

There is a fixed cost to producing content but the value of the content scales as the user count grows. 

For instance, the content that Netflix is producing today can reach its 167 million global subscribers. But as the number of subscribers grows, the content it is producing will reach a larger subscriber base. Put another way, the fixed amount spent on each movie or series will be spread out across a much larger revenue base as user count grows.

Over time, the amount of cash spent on content will take up a much lower percentage of revenue and, in turn, free cash flow should eventually be positive.

#2 Content retains value over a long time frame

Another point to note is that the company is actually already profitable and has been for a few quarters. Then why is the company free cash flow negative?

For one, the company is spending money upfront for content that it is only releasing in the future. As such, it does not recognise this into its income statements. Think of it as capital expenditure for the future.

The second reason is that the content is amortised over a multi-year time frame. I think investors underappreciate the fact that much of the original content that Netflix is producing will be in its content library forever. Good content, while most valuable when it’s first released, retains some of its value to viewers for years. Case in point include hits such as Friends and Seinfield, which fans love to rewatch. 

I think investors often overlook these two facts: (1) that Netflix’s current cash burn includes its spending for the future, and (2) good content retains its value over a multi-year period.

#3 Competition is not hurting Netflix as much as feared

When Disney and Apple announced that they would be entering the online streaming market, I’m sure many Netflix watchers (shareholders included) must have feared the worse. Disney has a vast library of intellectual property and Apple is flush with cash. Surely, Netflix would be in trouble.

However, competition has not hurt Netflix as much as some may have feared. In the fourth quarter of 2019, Netflix’s paid memberships in the United States increased by 400,000. While this fell short of analyst estimates, the growth in paid subscribers at a time when Disney Plus was released shows how sticky Netflix’s user base is. More impressively, the gain in member-count in the US in 2019 coincided with an increase in the membership price by US$2. 

Internationally, growth continues at a breakneck pace. Paid memberships outside of the US increased from 80.8 million in 2018 to 106 million in 2019, a 25% increase. 

There are a few things to glean from these trends. 

First, Netflix’s subscriber base is sticky. The lure of original content that customers love and the fact that Netflix’s price point is still considerably lower than cable TV means customers are willing to stick around despite price hikes.

Second, Disney Plus, Apple TV, Amazon Prime, and Netflix can co-exist. 

A recent survey of Netflix subscribers showed that they are willing to subscribe to multiple streaming video subscriptions. The trend is fueled by consumers reducing their spending on traditional TV offerings by turning to streaming services.

On top of that, subscribers who want to watch Netflix Originals have no alternative besides subscribing to Netflix.

In its most recent shareholder letter, Netflix explained:

“We have a big headstart in streaming and will work to build on that by focusing on the same thing we have focused on for the past 22 years – pleasing members.”

With Netflix’s content budget dwarfing all its competitors (US$15 billion in 2019 vs US$6 billion for Amazon Prime, the second-largest spender of content), the chances that subscribers switch to another online streaming platform looks much slimmer than what investors may have initially feared.

The Good Investors’ conclusion

Netflix is one of the more divisive stocks in the market today. There seems to be an endless discussion between bears and bulls online.

In my view, I think there are a few crucial aspects of Netflix that some investors may be overlooking:

  • Netflix has a clear path towards free cash flow generation 
  • It is spending wisely on well-loved content that retains value over a multi-year period
  • The threat of competition is not as bad as it looks

Moreover, management has a knack of spotting trends well before they develop. As such, shareholders should be confident that management will be able to adapt and thrive even as operating environments change.

Given all this, I think Netflix looks poised to prove its doubters wrong.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Share Buybacks: Good or Bad?

When should a company conduct a share buyback? Here are my thoughts on share buybacks and what investors should know about it.

Share buybacks is one of the more divisive topics in investing.

If you’re not familiar with the topic, share buybacks refer to a company repurchasing its own shares. Put another way, buybacks occur when the company uses its cash to purchase its own shares in the open market.

Simple economics suggests that share buybacks boost share prices by reducing the number of outstanding shares in the market. Fewer outstanding shares means remaining shareholders now own a larger piece of the pie.

However, share buybacks also reduce the company’s cash position. As such, the size of the pie is also smaller after share buybacks. 

So when are share buybacks good for shareholders and when are they detrimental?

When do share buybacks make sense?

Share buybacks can benefit shareholders if they tick certain boxes. The great Warren Buffett is a big fan of buybacks at the right price. He once said,

“The best use of cash, if there is not another good use for it in business, if the stock is underpriced is a repurchase.”

One advantage share buybacks have over dividends is that share buybacks reward shareholders in a more tax-effective manner in certain countries. In the US, local shareholders are taxed on dividends, while foreign shareholders from certain jurisdictions incur a 30% withholding tax. These taxes invariably reduce shareholder’s returns. But with share buybacks, companies can reduce their shares outstanding without incurring any tax expenses.

Share buybacks should also be most beneficial when shares are bought back below their true value. Apple, for instance, has a share buyback plan that reduced the total shares outstanding of the company. The share buybacks were made at strategic periods when shares of Apple traded at unfairly low valuations.

Competing for capital…

But share buybacks should only be undertaken when it is the best use of capital. On top of buybacks, a company has so many ways to deploy its cash, such as paying dividends, reinvesting the cash into the company, and acquiring other firms. Management, hence, needs to examine each possibility before deciding which is the best way to allocate capital. Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan Chase, reiterated:

“Buybacks should not be done at the expense of properly investing in our company.”

Again, Apple is a great example of buybacks done right. The iPhone maker generated more than US$50 billion in free cash flow each year for the past few years. Its shares were trading well below what the management believed to be its intrinsic value. As a result of its share repurchase plan, despite a fall in net income in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2019, Apple still managed to post a slight increase in earnings per share.

With more than US$100 billion in net cash, finding ways to put the capital to use can be a tough ask for Apple. That’s why I believe Apple’s decision to use the cash for buybacks when its share price was depressed is a prudent use of its excess cash.

When are share buybacks bad?

As mentioned at the start, share buybacks can be bad for shareholders too. This can happen when companies decide to pursue buybacks for the wrong reasons.

Below are some commonly cited but bad reasons I’ve come across that companies use to validate their buyback plan:

  • To prop up their share price
  • As a means to negate the impact of dilution due to share-based compensation
  • To fend off an acquirer
  • To boost earnings per share
  • Because they have run out of ideas for the cash

Such companies do not take into account whether the shares are cheap or not. Simply buying back shares to boost earnings per share or prop up the share price is not good to shareholders if the stock is overpriced.

Worse still, companies that buy back shares so that they can negate the impact of dilution without thinking about the stock price will invariably hurt shareholders.

I also believe that companies that use debt to make buybacks are asking for trouble. Buybacks should only be made when the company has excess cash and as a way to reward shareholders.

In addition, in Singapore, paying dividends is just as beneficial to shareholders as buybacks. Dividends in Singapore are not taxed and by paying out dividends, shareholders can decide for themselves if they wish to reinvest the dividends back into the company by buying more shares.

The Good Investors’ conclusion

Buffett is a big fan of share buybacks and with good reason too. It is a tax-efficient way (in certain countries) of rewarding shareholders and are a great way to allocate capital if the company’s shares are trading below its true value.

However, buybacks can also harm investors if the company buys back shares that are overpriced or do not provide a good return on capital.

As investors, we should not assume that buybacks are always the most efficient use of capital. We need to look deeper into the decision-making process to assess if management is really making the best possible capital allocation decision for growing shareholder value over the long-term.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

My Thoughts on Elite Commercial REIT

Elite Commercial REIT will start trading on 6 Feburary 2020. Here are some factors to know If you are considering buying into the UK-focused REIT.

Elite Commercial REIT is set to be the first REIT listing in Singapore in 2020. I know this article is a little late as the public offer closed yesterday. However, if you are still considering buying units in the open market, here are some factors to consider.

Things I like about the REIT

Let’s start with a quick rundown of some of the positive characteristics of the UK-based REIT. There are many points to go through here so I will be as brief as possible for each point.

Multi-property portfolio

Based on the prospectus, Elite Commercial REIT has an initial portfolio of 97 commercial properties in the UK. While the properties are all located in the United Kingdom, the large number of properties means that the REIT is not overly-reliant on any single property. The properties are also well-spread across the entire UK, with properties situated in Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England. 

Another thing to like is that all except for one property is free-hold. Even the sole property that is not free-hold has a very long land lease of 235 years.

Reliable tenant

Perhaps the most appealing aspect of the REIT is that all of its properties are leased to the UK government, specifically the Department for Work and Pensions. 

As it is virtually impossible that the UK government will default on its rent, there is very little tenancy risk.

Long leases

The weighted average lease expiry for the properties stands at a fairly long 8.6 years. Given the long leases, investors can rest easy knowing that the distribution will be fairly consistent for the next few years. 

However, investors should note that some properties have a break option in 3.6 years. Assuming these options are exercised, the portfolio’s weighted average lease expiry will drop to 4.89 years.

The properties are important to the UK government

80 of the 97 properties in the portfolio are used for front-end services such as JobCentre Plus. Furthermore, 86.3% of these JobCentre Pluses do not have an alternative JobCentre Plus within a 3-mile radius. This is important as investors need to know that there is a high likelihood that the Departement for Work and Pensions will renew its leases when the current contracts expire in 2028.

Triple net leases

The UK government has signed triple net leases for the properties. What this means is that it will cover all operational costs, property taxes and building insurance. The triple net leases provide the REIT with more visibility on cost for the period of the remaining lease.

Low gearing

Another thing to like about the REIT is its low gearing of 33.6%. That is well below the 45% regulatory ceiling, giving it room to make acquisitions in the future.

Decent Yield

The REIT’s IPO price of £0.68 represents a price-to-book ratio of 1.03 based on Collyer’s valuation report. In addition, the indicated distribution yield of 7.1% is higher than the average distribution yield of Singapore-listed REITs.

What I dislike

There are certainly a lot of things I like about Elite Commercial REIT. On the surface, it looks like a very stable REIT with a reliable tenant and the potential for acquisition growth. However, looking under the hood, I found unsavoury characteristics that might put off some investors.

Leases all expire at the same time

The previous owners of the property negotiated to lease the properties back to the UK government with all leases expiring on the same day- 31 March 2028. I much prefer a staggered lease expiry profile as it gives the REIT time to find new tenant should existing tenants fail to renew their leases.

Another concern is whether the UK government will indeed renew all contracts with the REIT when their leases expire. While the REIT is quick to point out that the UK government is likely to renew its leases, things could easily change in the future. If the UK government decides not to renew a few of its leases, the REIT will need to find a quick solution to prevent a rental gap.

Inflated market value

Another thing that I got alerted to by a fellow blogger’s article was that Collyer’s valuation of the portfolio was based on current rental leases. The existing leases are slightly above market rates and could suggest that the market value is somewhat inflated.

Likewise, as market rent is below the current rent, we could see rental rates reduce come 2028 when new contracts are signed.

IPO NAV Price Represents a 13.1% jump from purchase price just a year ago

Another thing to note is that the private trust of Elite Partners Holdings is selling the portfolio to the REIT just a year after buying the property. The sale price represents a 13.1% gain for the initial investors of the property portfolio.

Floating rate debt

The REIT has taken a floating rate loan. While floating-rate loans tend to have lower rates when it is first negotiated, it can also rise in the future. Even though rates have been dropping the last year, things could change in the future. Higher interest rate payments will result in lower distribution yield for investors.

Brexit concerns

The United Kingdom has just finalised its exit from the European Union. There are so many uncertainties regarding its exit. How will this impact its economy, property prices and even the value of the pound?

All of which could potentially impact distribution and rental rates in the UK.

The Good Investor’s Take

Elite Commercial REIT has both positive and negative characteristics. The indicative 7.1% yield and backing by the UK government are the main draws. However, the fact that all leases expire on the same day, the uncertainty surrounding Brexit and the potentially inflated market rate of the properties are things that investors should be concerned about.

Given these concerns, I will likely be staying on the sidelines for now.

*Editors note: In an earlier version of the article I stated that one of my concerns was that the private trust of Elite Partner Holdings was not participating in the IPO. However, upon clarification with the managers of Elite Commercial REIT, I realised that the four individual investors and Sunway Re Capital, who were the investors in the private trust that initially owned the portfolio were individually participating in the IPO. They each rolled over their principal investment amount from the private trust to the REIT. Elite Partner Holdings also has an interest in the REIT via Ho Lee Group and Tan Dah Ching. I have since edited the article to reflect the new information gleaned from management.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Why Facebook Shareholders Shouldn’t Panic

Facebook saw its shares slip 6% after releasing its 2019 fourth-quarter results. Despite this, I’m more bullish than ever on its prospects.

I woke up last Thursday to a rude surprise. My shares of Facebook had fallen 6% in a single trading session, following the company’s 2019 fourth-quarter earnings results. A big jump in expenses during the quarter was the culprit. 

However, after reassessing Facebook’s position, I think the decline was unwarranted. In fact, I feel more optimistic than ever for the social network’s long term prospects and am more than happy to hold onto my shares. 

Why investors have been put off

Before discussing the reasons why I am bullish about Facebook, let me first say that I acknowledge that there are very real reasons why the broader market is sceptical of Facebook. 

The first possible reason is that Facebook carries a degree of regulatory risk. We can’t sugarcoat that.

In recent months, Facebook incurred a US$5 billion fine from the Federal Trade Commission due to a privacy breach and had to pay a US$550 million settlement for collecting users’ facial recognition data. In addition, there have also been a few threats from European regulatory bodies.

These regulatory concerns are, in turn, the reason why Facebook’s expenses have skyrocketed. The company has spent big hiring thousands of employees to update its platform and make it safer for users. 

The second reason is Facebook’s decelerating growth. Facebook enjoyed 36% annualised top-line growth over the last 3 years. However, that growth has since decelerated. Shareholders who have been accustomed to the 30%-plus growth rate may have been disappointed by the latest figures.

Despite these two factors, I think Zuckerberg’s brainchild is still a great investment. Here’s why. 

The numbers are still really good

Despite a slight deceleration in growth in recent times, Facebook is still posting solid numbers.

In the fourth quarter of 2019, Facebook saw revenue jump 25% and income from operations grow 13%. Looking ahead, management said that it expects revenue-growth in 2020’s first quarter to decelerate by a low to a mid-single-digit percentage point compared to 2019’s fourth quarter.

Although a deceleration looks bad, that still translates to a healthy 20% increase in revenue.

The social media giant is also now sitting on US$55 billion in cash and marketable securities, and zero debt. On top of that, its cash flow from operations in 2019 was 24% higher than in 2018.

Other metrics are healthy too

Besides its financials, the company’s all-important user engagement metrics are also very healthy. Daily active users, monthly active users, and family daily active people were up 9%, 8% and 11% respectively at end-2019 compared to a year ago.

The worldwide average revenue per user also ticked up 15.6% from 2018’s fourth quarter, demonstrating that Facebook is doing an excellent job improving the monetisation of its gargantuan user base.

Facebook is addressing the regulatory concerns

Zuckerberg and his team have also taken privacy concerns very seriously. Zuckerberg emphasised in his recent conference call with analysts:

“This is also going to be a big year for our greater focus on privacy as well. As part of our FTC settlement, we committed to building privacy controls and auditing that will set a new standard for our industry going beyond anything that’s required by law today. We currently have more than 1,000 engineers working on privacy-related projects and helping to build out this program.”

Facebook is also rolling out a privacy checkup tool to close to 2 billion of its users to remind them to set their user privacy control to the level they wish for.

I think with Facebook’s size, the task of managing privacy is going to be a multi-year process but Facebook’s commitment to addressing the issue is certainly heartening for investors. 

Becoming a Super App

While advertising is Facebook’s bread and butter, the social media giant has the potential for so much more.

It now has online dating features, e-commerce, gaming, Watch and other features. Although not all of these features will cater to everyone, they each appeal to a certain segment of people. This will grow user engagement and increase ad impressions per user.

This is similar to WeChat in China. The Super app of the East has built-in functions such as payments, e-commerce, bookings, and much more. Facebook, with its billions of users, has the potential to become the Super app of the world.

New functions also give Facebook a different source of revenue. One example is through implementing a take rate for payments made on its platform. This could be a new revenue growth driver as Facebook plans to roll out WhatsApp payment and payment services to facilitate Facebook Marketplace.

History of great capital allocation decisions

Although there is a lot to like about Facebook’s business going forward, I think the most exciting thing is how Facebook will use its massive cash pile, which is growing by the day.

As mentioned earlier, Facebook is sitting on US$55 billion in cash (US$50 billion after it pays off the aforementioned US$5 billion fine). That’s an incredible amount of financial resources and the possibilities are endless.

Most importantly, Facebook has a brilliant track record of spending its cash wisely. In the past, it bought Instagram for just a billion dollars in 2012, solidifying its position as the leading social media player in the world. On top of that, the outlay for the Instagram investment should have already been more than covered by the ad revenue that Facebook has generated from it.

More recently, Facebook has been aggressively buying back shares. In its latest announcement, it said it has earmarked another US$10 billion for share repurchases, which I think is a great use of capital given its stock’s ridiculously cheap valuation (more on that later). This again shows that the decision-makers in Facebook are doing the right things with its ever-growing cash hoard.

Valuation too cheap to ignore

It is no secret that Facebook is not the most loved stock on Wall Street. Despite growing its top line by 26% in 2019 and the numerous tailwinds at its back, the stock still trades at just 23.5 times normalised earnings (after removing the one-off fines and settlement charges).

That’s the lowest multiple among the FAAMG stocks. For perspective, Alphabet, Apple, Microsoft and Amazon trade at price-to-earnings multiple of 31, 25, 29, and 87 respectively.

I simply don’t see how Facebook can suffer a further earnings multiple compression unless there’s a market-wide collapse.

Even after factoring the deceleration in growth, Facebook is still expected to grow revenue and profits by close to 20% in 2020 and beyond. Moreover, Facebook has so much cash on hand, its growth could even be boosted if Facebook decides to make an acquisition down the road.

The Good Investors’ Take

With so many opportunities for growth and the heavy fines behind it, Facebook is likely to see double-digit growth to its bottom line for years to come. Its enduring competitive moat looks unlikely to be eroded any time soon and the capital allocation decisions have been extremely sound.

Just as importantly, the stock trades at unreasonably beaten down valuations. Given everything, I’ve seen, I like my position in Facebook.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Does Twilio Fit Our Investing Framework?

Twilio’s stock has risen more than eight-fold since its IPO in 2016. Is the Communication software as a service company still worth investing?

Twilio (NYSE: TWLO) isn’t a household name, but many of us unknowingly use it every day. The software company provides developers with an in-app communication solution. By integrating phone numbers and messaging communications, Twilio offers communication channels including voice, SMS, Messenger, WhatsApp, and even video. 

When your Uber arrives and you receive a text, that’s Twilio. Airbnb uses Twilio to automate messages to hosts to alert them of a booking. eBay, Twitter, Netflix, Wix, Mecardo Libre each use Twilio in some form or other. 

With in-app communications set to boom and Twilio the top dog in this space, is Twilio worth investing in? To answer this, I will use my blogging partner’s six-point investment framework to dissect Twilio’s growth potential.

1. Is Twilio’s revenue small in relation to a large and/or growing market, or is its revenue large in a fast-growing market?

Twilio recently surpassed US$1 billion in annualised revenue run rate in the third quarter of 2019. That’s tiny compared to its market opportunity. The CPaas (communications platform as a service) segment is forecast to grow from US$3.3 billion in 2018 to US$17.2 billion in 2023- a 39% annualised growth rate.

International Data Corporation said in a report that CPaaS companies are driving this growth by “integrating new segments, churning out new use cases, and piquing the interest of enterprise developers with innovative digital solutions for customer engagement.”

With the acquisition of SendGrid last year, through an all-shares purchase, Twilio added email communication into its array of products. SendGrid also brought with it 84,000 customers, giving Twilio a new base of developers to cross-sell existing products to.

2. Does Twilio have a strong balance sheet with minimal or a reasonable amount of debt?

Twilio is financially sound. As of 30 September 2019, it had US$1.9 billion in cash and marketable securities and around US$450 million in debt (in the form of convertible senior notes). That translates to a net cash position of around US$1.5 billion.

That said, Twilio’s cash flow from operations has been lumpy over the past few years as it chased growth over profitability or cash flow.

While its relatively large cash position should provide it with a buffer to last a few years, investors should continue to monitor how Twilio is using its capital.

Twilio already ended up having to issue new shares in a secondary offering in 2019 to raise money. This diluted existing shareholders, and current shareholders of Twilio should not rule out further dilution in the future.

The table below shows Twilio’s cash flow over the past four years.

3. Does Twilio’s management team have integrity, capability, and an innovative mindset?

Twilio’s founder Jeff Lawson has overseen the company from the start (the company was founded in 2008). As mentioned earlier, Twilio has a US$1 billion revenue run rate. That’s an impressive achievement, and a testament to Lawson and the rest of the management team’s ability to scale the company.

I also believe Twilio’s executive compensation structure promotes long-term growth in the company.

Lawson’s base salary in 2018 was only 2% of his target pay mix. 51% was in restricted stock units and the other 47% was in stock options. As the stock options vest over a few years, it encourages planning towards increasing shareholder value over the long term.

Lawson’s base salary of just US$133,700 in 2018 is also low in comparison to what other CEOs are getting.

So far, Twilio’s management has also been able to strategically acquire companies to expand its product offering and customer base. Its purchase of SendGrid brought with it email communication capabilities and more than doubled Twilio’s existing active users.

Twilio’s management has also taken the opportunity to raise more capital as its shares trade at relatively high multiples. This, to me, seems like a prudent move, considering that Twilio needs some cash buffer as it looks to grow its business.

Twilio is also proving to be led by innovative leaders as the company has consistently introduced new products. In 2018, Twilio introduced Twilio Flex, a programmable contact centre that integrates multiple tasks into a single user interface. Twilio Flex opened a new door of opportunity to tap into.

4. Are Twilio’s revenue streams recurring in nature?

Twilio’s enjoys a sticky customer base. Its existing customers have a history of becoming increasingly dependent on Twilio’s services over the years.

The communication software company’s net dollar base expansion rate, a metric measuring net spend by existing customers, was 132% in the quarter ended 30 September 2019. What that means is that existing customers spent 32% more on Twilio’s services in the last 12 months compared to a year prior. 

More importantly, Twilio’s net dollar expansion rate has been consistently north of 100% for years. Its net dollar expansion rate was 140%, 128%, 161%, and 155% for 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015.

The beauty of Twilio’s business model is that there are no built-in contracts. Customers simply pay as they use the company’s software. The more messages they send using Twilio’s API, the more Twilio charges them.

As customers such as Uber, Lyft, Airbnb grow their own customer base, the need for in-app messaging increases, and Twilio grows along with its clients. The model also allows small enterprises to start using Twilio at the get-go due to the pay-as-you-go model.

It is also heartening to see that there is little concentration risk as the top 10 accounts contributed around 13% of Twilio’s total revenue in the most recent quarter.

5. Does Twilio have a proven ability to grow?

With a steady base or recurring revenue, Twilio has been able to focus its efforts on expanding its services and winning over new customers. Its customer account has risen more than six-fold from 2013 to 2018.

Source: Twilio 2018 Annual Report

The growth in customer accounts is also reflected in its financial statements. Revenue increased from below US$100 million in 2013 to more than US$600 million in 2018.

Source: Twilio 2018 Annual Report

That growth still has legs to run with base revenue (excluding the impact of its acquisition of SendGrid) in the first three quarters of 2019 increasing by 47% year-on-year.

6. Does Twilio have a high likelihood of generating a strong and growing stream of free cash flow in the future?

While Twilio’s topline has shown impressive growth, it has neither been able to generate consistent profit nor free cash flow.

Twilio has been spending heavily on research and development and marketing. In fact, the company has consistently spent around a quarter of its revenue of research and development.

However, I believe that there is a clear path towards profitability and free cash flow generation, as Twilio can eventually cut back its R&D and marketing expenses.

That being said, the company is still laser-focused on top-line growth at the moment and consistent profitability and free cash flow generation may take years.

Risks

One of the big risks I see in Twilio is succession risk. Lawson is the biggest reason for Twilio’s success so far. He is the founder and has led Twilio every step of the way. 

That said, Lawson is only 42 this year and is likely to continue at the helm for the foreseeable future.

I also believe that the high cash burn rate is still a concern. Investors should keep a close watch on Twilio’s free cash flow levels and hopefully, we can see it turn positive in the coming years.

Twilio also faces competition that could eat into its market share. Its competitors such as Nexmo, MessageBird, and PLivo are also growing quickly. Twilio will need to consistently upgrade its APIs to ensure that it defends its competitive edge. For now, Twilio’s competitive moat includes the high switching cost to a competitor.

Twilio also enjoys a network effect. In its 2018 annual report, Twilio said:

“With every new message and call, our Super Network becomes more robust, intelligent and efficient…Our Super Network’s sophistication becomes increasingly difficult for others to replicate over time as it is continually learning, improving and scaling.”

Valuation

Valuing a company is always tricky- especially so for a company that has no profits or consistent free cash flow.

As such, we will need to estimate what is the company’s long term growth potential and mature-state profit margins.

While some best-in-class SaaS companies enjoy profit and free cash flow margins of around 30%, that does not seem feasible for Twilio.

Twilio’s gross profit margin is only around 54%, much lower than other software companies such as Adobe which has a gross margin north of 80%. As such, I think that Twilio’s steady-state profit margin could potentially be closer to 10%.

Given the total addressable market of US$17 billion, and assuming Twilio can achieve a market share of around 50%, revenue can increase to around US$8 billion. Using my 10% net profit assumption, net profit will be around US$800 million. If growth can sustain at current rates of around 35%, Twilio will take around seven years to hit this size.

We also have to estimate a reasonable multiple to attach to its earnings. Adobe has a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 58 but it is still growing. Let’s assume a discount to that multiple and assume Twilio can command a P/E ratio of 40. That translates to a US$32 billion market. Given all these assumptions, Twilio will have a market cap that is twice its current market cap in seven years, which translates to a decent 10% annualised return for existing shareholders.

The Good Investors’ conclusion

There are certainly compelling reasons to like Twilio as a company. Its 40%-plus top-line growth, huge market opportunity, dominant position in the CPaaS industry, and capable management team, are just some of the reasons why I think Twilio has a bright future ahead.

However, its stock is richly priced, trading at more than 16 times revenue. It has yet to record a profit and has been burning cash. There is a lot of optimism baked into the stock already and the company needs to live up to the high expectations if investors are to make a decent annualised profit from the stock.

While my valuation assumptions predict a decent return, there are certainly risks involved. Any stumble in those growth projections or an earnings multiple compression will result in mediocre returns to investors. I suggest that investors who want to take a nibble off of Twilio’s growth should size their position to reflect the risk involved.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Investing Advice From Robert Vinall, A Little-known Investing Expert

Robert Vinall’s fund, Business Owner TGV has compounded at more than 19% per annum. How did Vinall achieve such mouth-watering returns?

Robert Vinall may not be a name that rings a bell with many investors. Yet, his investing performance certainly warrants some attention. His fund, Business Owner TGV, has produced a mouth-watering 649.6% total gain since its inception in late 2008. That translates to a 19.6% annualised return, easily outpacing the MSCI World Index’s 9.47% annualised return over the same period.

I recently spent a few hours reading some of his writings on investing and his investment philosophy to gain some insight on how he managed to achieve these amazing returns.

He invests like a business owner

As the name of his fund suggests, Vinall invests as though he owns the businesses that he invests in. He says:

“My philosophy can be summed up as: Investing like an owner in businesses run by an engaged and rational owner with the capital of investors who think like an owner.”

But what does thinking and acting like a business owner really entail? In essence, it means ignoring short-term movements of share prices, and putting greater emphasis on buying great companies that can compound value over time.

Vinall is, therefore, comfortable with buying shares that (1) have a troubled short-term outlook but have solid long-term prospects, (2) have no near-term price catalysts or (3) is shunned by Wall Street analysts.

Because of the above, he is able to buy shares that Wall Street has ignored, giving him a great entry point on what he believes are long-term compounders.

In addition, he also looks for business managers who act like business owners. Shareholder-friendly managers focus on long-term steady results, rather than near-term share price movements. 

He looks for four key things in a company

To determine if a stock is worth investing in, Vinall looks for four key characteristics in a company:

  1. It is a business he understands
  2. The business is building or has a long-term competitive advantage
  3. The managers act with shareholders’ interests at heart
  4. The share price is attractive

Using this framework, Vinnal has found investments that have compounded meaningfully over time.

Although the framework is simple it is by no means easy. Vinall points out:

“An investment process which consists of four steps, each of which has a “yes” or “no” answer may sound simple and indeed it is. This is because the best capital allocation decisions are typically made at moments of extreme market distress. To operate effectively in such an environment requires a process which is robust and simple to administer.

However, each capital allocation decision is preceded by months of research and often years of waiting for the right price to come along.”

He has a concentrated portfolio

Some of the best investors such as Warren Buffett, Chuck Akre, and Terry Smith prescribe having a concentrated portfolio and Vinall is no different.

As of January 2020, Business Owner TGV only had 10 stocks in its portfolio. That’s a heavily concentrated portfolio when compared to most other funds.

A concentrated portfolio of high-conviction stocks gives investors a better chance of market-beating returns. In his 2019 letter to shareholders, Vinall noted that he had dinner with legendary investor Charlie Munger at his home. Over the course of dinner, one of the topics that came up was how concentrated an investment portfolio should be. 

Vinall wrote:

“His (Munger’s) bigger point was that the truly exceptional opportunity only comes along a few times in a lifetime. When it does, the important thing, according to Charlie, is to: ‘use a shovel, not a teaspoon’.” 

He believes it’s always better to be invested than on the sidelines

With recession fears looming, investors today are asking whether it is a good time to invest.

Vinall believes there are two faulty assumptions underlying this question. The first faulty assumption is that the stock market gyrates around the same level. On the contrary, developed markets should increase at around 6% per year which translates to around an 8-fold increase over 48 years. 

Vinall wrote:

“If you have a 40 year plus time horizon and an investment opportunity that will go up 8-fold, how much is there to think about? The smart money is invested, not on the side-lines fretting about what to do.”

The other flawed assumption is that investing is easy. Investing is never easy, as most successful investors will tell you. As such it is not as simple as asking whether now is a good time to invest. 

Vinall explains:

“In my experience, good investment opportunities are always plentiful. The limiting factors are the ability to identify them and, having identified them, the courage to act.”

The Good investors’ conclusion

Vinall has been one of the top-performing investors of the last decade. His fund’s return speaks for itself. Vinall is also an exceptionally generous investor who is willing to share his investing insights, philosophies, and success stories. I strongly encourage you to read more of his writings which can be found here.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Should Investors Be Worried About The Wuhan Virus?

The Wuhan virus is sadly proving more destructive than earlier anticipated. What should investors do in these uncertain times?

Sadly, the Wuhan Virus is proving more devastating than earlier expected. The latest figures yesterday afternoon showed that the death toll had already risen to 102, with more than 4,500 cases confirmed. These numbers are almost certain to mushroom.

The coronavirus has also impacted global stock markets as investors fret about the financial impact of the disease.

The S&P 500 in the US fell 1.6% on Monday, while the Straits Times Index at home in Singapore was down by as much as 3% yesterday. So what should investors do now?

Think long term

Unfortunately, the Wuhan Virus is certain to impact the world economy. Tourism to and from China is expected to fall. Shopping malls in China are closed. Schools and universities there have extended their Chinese New Year holiday and will only be reopened on a case by case basis.

China has even shut public transport in certain cities to discourage people from going out. It is likely that we will see consumers in China adjusting to the fear of the virus by going out less and spending less for a few months after the virus is controlled.

All of which will have a very real impact on not just companies in China, but around the world. The impact is exacerbated due to the Wuhan virus epidemic coinciding with the Chinese New year period- a period that usually sees higher travel and consumer expenditure.

That being said, investors should not let the near-term impact of the virus affect their investment decision making.

The SARs, H1N1, and Ebola epidemics have each been devastating. However, financial markets continued ticking on like clockwork.

Source: Marketwatch

As you can see from the chart above, the world has experienced 13 different epidemics since the 1970s. Yet, global stocks – measured by the MSCI World Index – has survived each of those, registering long term gains after each outbreak.

Where do you see the world in five years?

With society more prepared today to deal with a global epidemic, the spread and impact of the Wuhan virus will also hopefully not be as devastating as prior outbreaks.

Perhaps the best way to keep a clear head in these uncertain times is to do a simple mental exercise.

Consider the questions below:

  • In 5 years time, will Chinese consumers still fear going out?
  • Will shopping malls in China still be closed?
  • Are public transports likely to be still shut down in five years time?
  • Will we still even be talking about the Wuhan virus?

I think the most likely answer to all of the questions is “No”. 

The Good Investors’ conclusion

Sadly, the Wuhan virus is having a devastating impact. Lives have been lost and the number of deaths is likely to balloon. My heart goes out to everyone affected by this destructive disease.

But from a financial point of view, we as investors should not let the near-term earnings-impact cloud our judgement. Yes, the Wuhan virus will likely affect the economy and bottom-line of some companies. However, I believe the world today is better equipped to curb the spread of an outbreak than ever before. As such, I believe investors who continue to focus on fundamentals, ignore the noise, and think long will likely be rewarded eventually.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Ulta Beauty is Too Cheap To Ignore

Ulta Beauty is one of the top performing stocks of the last decade. Despite near-term headwinds, I think now may be the best time to pick up more shares.

Ulta Beauty (NASDAQ: ULTA) is a retailer defying the odds. While many retailers have struggled since the introduction of e-commerce, Ulta’s sales have risen sharply over the last decade. Its share price has mirrored its business performance, rising nearly 1300% over that time frame, making it one of the top-ten performing US stocks of the decade. But Ulta’s stock lost some of its shine towards the end of last year- with the share price falling 25%-  after the company cut its full-year outlook for 2019.

Investors were also spooked by an industry-wide slow-down in cosmetic sales. But with Ulta Beauty shares trading at only 23 times earnings now, I believe it is way too cheap to ignore.

What caused the sell-down?

The first thing to note is Ulta still remains a fine business. Ulta has consistently won market share from other beauty retailers in the country and that has not changed. The only problem now is Ulta could suffer some near-term earnings volatility due to the downcycle of cosmetic sales in the US.

In the latest 2019 third-quarter earnings conference call, CEO Mary Dillion explained:

“Like other consumer categories, makeup has experienced a number of up and down cycles. The most recent growth cycle began in 2014, driven by new application techniques and looks like contouring, highlighting and brow styling, and new products such as pallets, minis, and travel sizes. The rise of social media influencers, video tutorials and selfies also contributed to strong growth in the category.

After several years of robust growth, the category began to decelerate in 2017 and turn negative in late 2018, resulting from a lack of engaging newness and incremental innovation. This negative trend has continued through 2019 with further deceleration in the most recent quarter.”

But there are reasons to be positive…

Despite the near-term challenges, there are still good reasons to be bullish about Ulta. 

The numbers are still really good

First, even though Ulta had a poor third quarter by its high standards, the company still delivered decent results. Total sales increased by 12% and comparable store sales increased by 6.2%. Diluted earnings per share, excluding last year’s tax benefit, increased by 11.5%.

Despite the decline in cosmetics sales in the broader US market, Ulta still posted low single-digit growth in that category. That just goes to show that Ulta continues to drive meaningful market share growth across the cosmetics category.

According to data for February through July, Ulta captured 24.5% of the prestige beauty market (as tracked by NPD Group, an American Market research company). That’s 2.1 percentage points better than last year.

Cosmetic sales will rebound

Cosmetics remains Ulta’s largest revenue contributor at around 50%, so a market-wide sales decline will no doubt impact Ulta’s business. But the downcycle will eventually come to an end.

Dillion, who has been extremely candid and frank with shareholders, believes that innovation and new products will help aid the turnaround. She said in the latest earnings conference call:

“We continue to believe that the headwinds facing the makeup category are largely cyclical, resulting from a lack of incremental innovation and compelling newness. We remain confident that makeup category will return to growth, but recognize that it will take time.”

Other categories picking up the mettle

Yes, cosmetics is an important part of Ulta’s business but Ulta is not just about cosmetics. In fact, its other segments in total make up about 50% of sales. One of the strongest growth categories in recent years is skincare. Suncare, prestige, and mass-market skincare products each delivered double-digit growth in Ulta’s most recent reporting quarter. 

Gen Z spending habits are also shifting towards skincare as young women increasingly decide to go for a more natural look. The Gen Z demographic is more engaged in skin care products than other cohorts were at the same age.

Haircare and fragrance are also both expanding. The performance of these other categories should help to reduce the impact of the slowdown in cosmetic sales.

Ulta is growing its membership base

At the end of the 2019 third quarter, Ulta had 33.9 million active members in its Ultamate Rewards program. That’s 11% higher than it was last year. The growing member base shows that Ulta is still attracting new customers to its shops.

On top of that, once customers sign up, they receive points, which can then be redeemed for gifts, giving them extra incentives to shop at Ulta.

The beauty segment is not as impacted by e-commerce

While Ulta’s online sales increased by around 20% per year in the latest quarter, brick and mortar sales still make up the bulk of the company’s business.

Fortunately for Ulta, according to a survey by Piper Jaffray, 91% of female teens still prefer in-store shopping for beauty products versus online. Consumers still prefer the in-person experience of testing colours, fragrances, and textures when it comes to beauty products.

As such, until augmented reality (AR) can truly replace the in-person experience, I don’t foresee Ulta losing significant market share to online sales channels.

Rewarding shareholders

Ulta has also been rewarding shareholders by using the cash generated from its business to buyback shares. The total number of outstanding shares dropped by close to 4% in the quarter ended 2 November 2019 from a year ago. With shares trading at a low valuation (I will touch on this later), I think it makes perfect sense for the company to continue using its spare cash to buy back shares.

Ulta is sitting on slightly over US$200 million in cash and has no debt (if we exclude its operating lease liabilities), giving it the financial muscle to continue to pursue share buybacks in the future.

More importantly, its business remains a cash cow. The beauty retail giant generated operating cash flow of US$634 million, US$779 million, and US$956 million in fiscal 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively. And in the first 39 weeks of fiscal 2019, Ulta’s operating cash flow was up 2.8% from the year before to US$558 million.

The reliable stream of cash flow will enable the beauty retailer to continue reducing its outstanding share count further.

Valuation

As you can see, despite Wallstreet’s skepticism about Ulta, I think there are still numerous reasons to believe its long-term growth is intact.

On top of that, shares of Ulta are trading at what I would consider extremely low valuations. The company expects to earn diluted earnings per share of at least US$11.93 in fiscal 2019. Ulta currently trades at US$273, which translates to around 23 times that earnings projection.

An earnings multiple of 23 is much lower than LVMH (which owns Sephora), Loreal, and Estee Lauder – they trade at 33, 38 and 42 times earnings respectively. 

As such, barring a market-wide collapse, it is hard to see how Ulta can suffer a further compression in its earnings multiple.

More importantly, Ulta’s problems are likely short-term in nature. Cosmetics sales will rebound in the future and in the meantime, other beauty segments are picking up the slack.

On top of that Ulta looks likely to continue to win market share as it targets to open more stores in the coming years.

Over the longer term, Ulta has built lasting brand appeal and partnerships with some of the most loved beauty brands in the world. Despite being a dominant retailer in the US beauty industry, Ulta’s market share in the beauty products market was just 7% in 2018. This small share means the company should have room to grow much bigger.

With all that said, while I think it is reasonable for investors to be cautious about near-term sales volatility, I think Ulta’s valuation and long-term prospects are just too good to ignore.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Is CapitaLand Mall Trust and Capitaland Commercial Trust’s Proposed Merger Good For Unitholders?

CapitaLand Mall Trust and CapitaLand Commercial Trust are set to merge to form the biggest REIT in Singapore. Does it benefit the unitholders of both REITs?

CapitaLand Mall Trust (CMT) and CapitaLand Commercial Trust (CCT) are set to combine to form the largest REIT in Singapore. The proposed merger is the latest in a string of mergers over the last few years.

Mergers may benefit REITs through greater diversification, higher liquidity, cost savings due to economies of scale and access to cheaper equity.

With that said, here are some things that investors should note about the proposed deal between the two CapitaLand REITs.

Details of the merger

CMT is offering to buy each CCT unit for 0.72 new units of itself and S$0.259 in cash. The enlarged REIT will be renamed Capitaland Integrated Commercial Trust (CICT).

Source: Presentation slides for CMT and CCT merger

The combined REIT will own both CMT and CCT’s existing portfolios, making it the largest REIT in Singapore and the third-largest in Asia Pacific. Its portfolio will include 24 properties valued at S$22.9 billion.

Source: Joint announcement by CCT and CMT regarding the merger

What does it mean for current CMT unitholders?

The best way to analyse such a deal is to look at it from the angle of both parties separately. 

For CMT unitholders, the merger will result in them owning a smaller stake in an enlarged REIT. Here are the key points that investors should note:

  • Based on pro forma calculations, the merger is distribution per unit-accretive. The chart below shows the DPU (distribution per unit) increase had the merger taken place last year.
Source: Presentation slides for CMT and CCT merger
  • Based on similar assumptions, the deal is NAV-accretive. The net asset value (NAV) per unit of the enlarged REIT is expected to be S$2.11, higher compared to S$2.07 before the merger.
  • As debt will be used, it will cause CMT’s aggregate leverage to increase from 32.9% to 38.3%.

The question here is whether current CMT owners will be better off owning units in the merged entity. I think so. The deal will be both DPU and NAV-accretive. While the merged entity will have a higher gearing, I think the trade-off is still advantageous.

On top of that, the enlarged REIT will also benefit from economies of scale. As I briefly mentioned earlier, bigger REITs benefit from diversification, cost savings and the ability to take on bigger projects.

The downside for CMT

Although I think the deal is beneficial to unitholders of CMT, I doubt it is the most efficient use of capital.

CMT is paying 0.72 new units of itself, plus S$0.259 in cash, for each CCT unit. That works out to around S$2.131 for each CCT unit. Even though that seems fair when you consider CCT’s current unit price of S$2.13, the purchase price is much higher than CCT’s actual book value per unit of S$1.82.

Needless to say, CMT unitholders would benefit more if CMT is able to buy properties at or below their book value. Ultimately, because of the current market premium attached to CCT units, CMT will end up having to pay a 17% premium to CCT’s book value.

Although the impact of paying above book value is countered by the fact that CMT will be issuing new units of itself at close to 25% above book value, I can’t hep but wonder if CMT could gain more by issuing new units to buy other properties at or below book values.

What does it mean for CCT unitholders?

At the other end of the deal, CCT unitholders are getting a stake in the merged entity and some cash for each unit they own.

Here are the key things to note if you are a CCT unitholder:

  • Based on pro forma calculations, the merger is DPU-accretive for CCT, if we assume that the cash consideration is reinvested at a return of 3% per annum.
Source: Presentation slides for CMT and CCT merger
  • From a book value perspective, the deal will be dilutive for CCT unitholders. Before the merger, each CCT unit had a book value of S$1.82. After the deal, CCT unitholders will own 0.72 new units in the enlarged REIT and S$0.259 in cash. The enlarged REIT (based on pro forma calculations) will have a NAV per unit of S$2.11. Ultimately, each CCT unit will end with a book value of S$1.78, a slight decrease from S$1.82 before the deal.

Other considerations for CCT unitholders

For CCT unitholders, the question is whether they will be better off owning (1) units of the existing CCT, or (2) cash plus 0.72 units of the enlarged REIT.

I think there is no right answer here. Ownership of the enlarged REIT has its benefits but CCT unitholders also end up obtaining the new units at quite a large premium to book value.

Although the deal will result in DPU-accretion for current CCT unitholders, the enlarged REIT also has a higher gearing than CCT and consequently, has less financial power to make future acquisitions.

Investors need to decide whether the yield-accretion is worth paying up for (due to the new units being issued at 25% premium to book value), or whether they rather maintain the status quo of owning a decent REIT with a lower gearing and better book value per unit.

The Good Investors’ Conclusion

There are certainly reasons for both sets of unitholders to support the proposed merger between these two CapitaLand REITs. The deal will benefit CMT unitholders in terms of both DPU and NAV-accretion, while CCT unitholders will also gain in terms of DPU growth.

In addition, the enlarged REIT could theoretically benefit from economies of scale, portfolio diversification, and greater liquidity.

That said, I have my doubts on whether it is the best use of capital by CMT due to the purchase price’s 17% premium to CCT’s book value. CCT unitholders also have a lot to digest, and they will need to assess if they are comfortable that the deal will be dilutive to them from a book value perspective.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.

Should Investors Bet on Uniqlo?

Uniqlo has been one of the fastest growing apparel retail brands in the world. But with its stock sitting at all-time highs, is it still worth investing in?

Most of you reading this would be familiar with Uniqlo.

The Japanese clothing brand is one of the fastest-growing apparel retailers in the world. I experienced first hand how much Uniqlo has thrived over the past few years. Its popularity in our homeland, Singapore, has exploded, with Uniqlo outlets appearing at most major malls in the country (I’m a big fan of its products too).

The numbers speak for themselves. Sales at Fast Retailing (Uniqlo’s parent company) increased by 179% from its financial year 2011 to its financial year 2019. Its shares have reflected that growth, climbing 320% during that time.

But with Fast Retailing’s share price sitting near a record-high, have investors missed the boat? I decided to take a closer look at its business to see if its current share price still presents a good investment opportunity. I will use my blogging partner Ser Jing’s six-point investment framework to dissect Fast Retailing. 

1. Is Fast Retailing’s revenue small in relation to a large and/or growing market, or is its revenue large in a fast-growing market?

As mentioned earlier, Fast Retailing is now the third-largest apparel retailer in the world. It recorded 2.3 trillion yen (US$20.8 billion) in sales in the year ended 31 August 2019. On paper that seems huge. You may be thinking: “How could it possibly grow much larger?”

However, looking under the hood, I realised that Fast Retailing’s US$20 billion in revenue is tiny in comparison to its global market opportunity.

The global apparel market is expected to hit US$1.5 trillion this year. More importantly, Uniqlo is well-placed to grab a growing share of this tremendous market. Uniqlo International saw sales of around 1 trillion yen (US$9.34 billion). That’s a drop in the ocean when you compare it to the global apparel market.

Putting that in perspective, Uniqlo’s revenue in Japan was 872.9 billion yen (US$7.9 billion) in the 12-months ended August 2019. Japan has a population of roughly 126.8 million and yet revenue from Japan made up 36% of the company’s total revenue. China’s population alone is more than 10 times as big as Japan. That gives us an idea of the massive international opportunity that Uniqlo can potentially tap into.

With Uniqlo opening its first shops in India recently and expanding its presence in Europe, China, the United States, and Southeast Asia, I expect Uniqlo International’s sales to become much more important for the company in the coming years.

In his FY2017 annual letter to shareholders, Tadashi Yanai, CEO of Fast Retailing, said:

“My focus is to ensure solid growth in Greater China and Southeast Asia, which have the potential to grow into markets 10-20 times the size of Japan’s. We have announced five-year targets of increasing revenue from current ¥346.4 billion to ¥1 trillion in Greater China, and from ¥110 billion to ¥300 billion in Southeast Asia and Oceania.”

2. Does Fast Retailing have a strong balance sheet with minimal or a reasonable amount of debt?

A robust balance sheet enables a company to withstand any economic slowdowns. It also enables the company to use its extra cash to expand its business.

Uniqlo ticks this box easily. The Japanese retail giant boasted around  ¥1.1 trillion (US$10 billion) in cash and cash equivalents and around ¥660 billion (US$6 billion) in debt as of 30 November 2019. That translates to a healthy US$4 billion net cash position.

Equally important, Fast Retailing is a serious cash machine. The company has consistently generated around US$1 billion in cash from operations at the minimum in each year since FY2015. The table below shows some of the important cash flow metrics.

3. Does Fast Retailing’s management team have integrity, capability, and an innovative mindset?

To me, management is the single most important aspect of my stock investments. 

Fast Retailing’s founder and CEO, Tadashi Yanai, has proven himself to be everything you can ask for in a leader.

He founded the first Uniqlo store back in 1984 and has since built it into an internationally recognised brand with a network of more than 2,000 stores globally. Uniqlo is also one of the most innovative companies in apparel retail. It has patented some of its unique materials such as Heat tech and Airism. 

Yanai was also able to transform the company’s brand image. Previously, Uniqlo was perceived as a discount retailer selling cheap and low-quality apparel. Seeing this, Yanai decided to open a 3-story iconic store in Harajuku in central Tokyo in 1998. This was the turning point for the brand as consumers’ perceptions shifted. Uniqlo became viewed as a brand that offered affordable but high-quality products. Yanai’s willingness to spend big to improve the brand-perception is testament to his foresight and capability.

More recently, Fast Retailing has embraced technology to improve its work processes and decision making. The Ariake Project, which aims to transform the company digitally, was initiated two years ago and is beginning to bear fruit. Through the Ariake project, Fast Retailing restructured its decision-making process and now small, flat teams are able to faster analyse the business, make decisions, and implement ideas. Fast Retailing also has automated warehouse processes such as stock receipts, sorting, packing, and inspection.

The company has been treating shareholders fairly too, by paying around 30% of its profits as dividends. 

It is also heartening to see that Yanai owns around 44% of Fast Retailing. With such a large position in the company, his interests will likely be aligned with shareholders.

4. Are Fast Retailing’s revenue streams recurring in nature?

Recurring revenue is an important yet often overlooked aspect of a business. Recurring revenue allows a company to spend less effort and money to retain existing clients and instead focus on other aspects of the business.

In Fast Retailing’s case, I believe a large portion of its revenue is recurring in nature. The company has built up a strong brand following and repeat customer purchases are highly likely.

5. Does Fast Retailing have a proven ability to grow?

Fast Retailing has been one of the fastest-growing apparel retailers in the world. The chart below shows Fast Retailing’s sales compared to other leading apparel retailers since 2000.

Source: Fast Retailing 2018 Annual Report

The red line shows Fast Retailing’s annual sales. As you can see, Fast Retailing started from the lowest base among the top five global apparel retailers. However, it has since seen steady growth and has overtaken traditional powerhouses such as Gap and L Brands.

It is worth noting that the most recent quarter saw a slight dip in revenue and operating profit. However, I believe the long-term tailwinds should see the company return to growth in the longer-term.

6. Does Fast Retailing have a high likelihood of generating a strong and growing stream of free cash flow in the future?

A company’s true worth is not based on its accounting profits but on the cash flow it can generate in the future. That is why Ser Jing and I have an eye on companies’ free cash flow numbers. 

I believe Fast Retailing has all the ingredients in place to consistently generate increasing free cash flow in the years ahead.

The company is expanding its store count internationally, with China and Southeast Asia set to become important drivers of growth. As mentioned earlier, Fast Retailing’s free cash flow has been increasing from FY2015 to FY2019.

Fast Retailing’s management is also cautiously optimistic about its International market expansion prospects, and showed the chart below in its FY2018 annual report:

Source: Fast Retailing FY2018 annual report

Based on the chart, management is expecting Uniqlo International sales revenue to double from 2018 to 2022. That tremendous runway of growth will likely provide the company with a growing stream of free cash flow.

Risks

A discussion on a company will not be complete without assessing the risks.

I think the most important risk for the company is key-man risk. The current CEO and founder, Yanai, is the main reason for Fast Retailing’s growth. His vision and ability to grow the brand, develop new products, and enter new markets is the driving force behind Uniqlo’s success.

As a major shareholder of the company, he has also made decisions that have been favourable towards other shareholders. Moreover, Yanai is not getting any younger and will be turning 71 in February this year.

That said, I believe Yanai is still going strong. Despite ranking as the 31st richest man in the world, and the richest in Japan, he still has the ambition to drive the company further. Yanai is aware of succession planning for the company and is confident that the new leaders will step up to the plate. He said in late 2018:

“Okazaki (current CFO) and others in management have been progressing to where, even if I am not here, the company will be run properly.”

In its bid to expand internationally, Uniqlo also needs to properly manage its brand image. Mismanagement of the brand can have a detrimental effect on sales, as was the case with Under Armour.

In addition, I think a large part of Fast Retailing’s sales growth will have to come from new product offerings. Uniqlo needs to maintain its high standards while developing new fabrics and designs to keep its customers coming back.

Valuation

Valuing a company usually requires a wee bit of estimation and assumptions, so bear with me here.

In Fast Retailing’s case, I will assume it can hit management’s targets of doubling its International sales to around ¥1.6 trillion by 2023. This assumption seems fair, given the potential for China and Southeast Asia alone to hit around ¥1.3 trillion in sales by that time.

For this exercise, I also assume that its sales in Japan will maintain at around ¥900 billion. In addition, I assume that operating margins for Japan and International sales are 11.5% and 13.5% respectively (based on historical margins).

Given all these assumptions, Fast Retailing can expect profits after tax in the region of around ¥225 billion yen (30% tax rate on pre-tax operating profits).

Nike currently trades at a price-to-earnings multiple of around 35. Attaching that multiple to my 2023 earnings estimate, I estimate that Fast Retailing can have a market cap of ¥7.9 trillion in the next few years.

That is 17% higher than its current market cap, despite assuming a fall in the price-to-earnings multiple from its current 39 to 35.

The Good Investors’ Conclusion

Fast Retailing is undoubtedly a company that possesses many great qualities. A visionary leader, a powerful brand, an enormous addressable market, patented products that consumers love, and more. Its finances speak for themselves, with strong cash flow, earnings, and revenue growth.

Based on my estimates, the company’s valuation has room to grow over the next four years even if there is an earnings-multiple compression. In addition, investors should also consider that Fast Retailing can extend is growing streak well beyond the next four years.

As such, despite the company trading near all-time highs, and with the existence of some execution risks, I believe there is enough positives to warrant picking up shares of Fast Retailing today.

If you enjoyed this article, I wrote a similar article on another apparel brand, Lululemon.

Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life.