Category Archives: Speculation Observation

Observations of Penny Stocks–Viable Strategy

Is there a sensible way to speculate in penny stocks? We examined an approach to reduce risk while increasing success in penny stocks.

Our approach starts with a list of Nasdaq companies that have regained listing compliance by meeting the $1.00 minimum bid price requirement. We obtained this information through Google Search, company press releases, or Nasdaq press releases. The time frame for this assessment is from 2019-2020. Keep in mind that 2020 experienced one of the largest declines and rebound.

The first table shows a summary of the result broken down by various time frame. The second table contains individual stock detail.

Speculation in Penny Stocks Summary

The average rate of return, for this frame, was around 100% if we purchase and hold for approximately 9-12 months. Most of the gained came occurred in 2020.

Results based on individual holdings varied widely. To highlight the key to success, we can look at Seanergy Maritime Holdings (SHIP) which lost virtually all its value (-97%) and Kopin Corp (KOPN) which gained 575% in one year. An equally weighted purchase of these 2 companies would have produced exceptional results.

The reason this strategy can lead to a profitable trades is driven mainly by the lopsided risk and reward profile. While some stocks lost nearly all their value, others gained more than +100%. While success rates (positive return) hover around +50%, the uneven profile of risk reward makes this strategy viable.

Although the duration of this study was limited to 2 years, which include down and up cycle, we conclude that this strategy is a viable way to identify and possibly speculate in penny stocks. However, the key to success is diversification and one must purchase and hold as many stocks as possible over the studied timeframe.

Reference:

Kellogg (K) Observation

Kellogg (K) stock peaked at $72 in July 2020. Since then, the stock has fallen to $57 (-20%) in 2021. The underperformance put the stock on our radar in January 2021 (yellow arrow). Stock has been trading in range since and appears to be breaking out of that range today. Such action is bullish to a technician or chart readers. Fundamentally, the stock is undervalued based on our 10-year target. The two forces, fundamental & technical, appears to be in alignment with one another. It will be good to revisit Kellogg after 6 months or a year to review how this situation turn out.

Kellogg 2021.03.25

Speculation Observation: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (TEVA) at $50.27

A reader indicates that Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (TEVA) is a great stock although there is some confusion as to why the company is trading at such a low price. We took a look at Teva and came up with the following thoughts.
According to Value Line dated January 14, 2011, Teva has paid a dividend since 2000. The average dividend yield when the stock price peaked has been 0.69% and the average dividend yield at the low price has been 1.06%. Based on the close of trading on April 4, 2011, Teva has a dividend yield of 1.74%.
In order for the stock to trade at the historical normal low price/high yield; Teva should trade at $82.07. If Teva were to eventually trade back at the historical high price/low yield, then the stock potentially could rise to $126.
We’re going to take the conservative route and assume that Teva’s new low yield/high price is at the 1.06% yield level. This suggests that the upside target for the stock is 64%. We arrive at this conclusion assuming that all is lost for Teva to ever go back to the 10-year dividend yield range between 0.69% and 1.06%.
An additional consideration is the growth rate of the dividend, which has averaged 26% in the last 5 years. Looking ahead, we considered the most conservative approach to estimating what the stock would be if Teva were to increase the dividend by only 10%. At the historical low price/high yield (1.06%), Teva would be worth $86.79 the same time next year. Any amount below $86 and Teva would be extremely undervalued, all things being equal, or about to go out of business (it’s possible).
As with the historical dividend yield range, the price to book ratios (P/B) are correspondingly out of alignment. In the last 10-year, Teva’s P/B ratio at the highs has averaged 4.41x. At the low in the stock price, the P/B ratio has normally traded at 2.65x. With Teva trading at 2.05x book, the price could easily rise by 30% to $65 just to achieve the prior low price to book ratio range.
For the NLO team, the downside risk is much more important than the upside prospects. According to Dow Theory, Teva has the following downside targets:
  • $47.06 (fair value based on 7/2006 low)
  • $41.30
  • $29.77
Charles H. Dow indicated that the fair value of a stock is the average price that is paid by investors. The fair value is the point at which an investor, as opposed to speculators, will consider buying or selling a stock. The fair value that we’ve arrived is based on the low of July 2006. If Teva were to decline below $47.06, the prospects for $29.77 become almost inevitable. Our concern is that the macro conditions favor a market decline, which would put additional downside pressure on Teva.  As Teva declines below fair value we will provide an updated estimate of fair value upon request.

Please revisit New Low Observer for edits and revisions to this post. Email us.

Speculation Observation: Cephalon at $58.99

Lately, in the pharmaceutical industry, it seems that you just can’t win. The big pharma companies are being thrown under the bus because of patent expirations, diminished pipelines and lawsuits. On the horizon are the firms most likely to be considered the next big pharma with a pipeline of products but also facing patent expirations and lawsuits.
In the case of Cephalon (CEPH), it couldn’t catch a break if it was handed to them. On Friday February 11, 2011, Barron’s came out with an analyst report (article here) that downgraded Cephalon from “Average” to “Below Average” with a price target of $54. Considering that Cephalon was already selling within 8.5% of the 52-week low at the time the article was published, we’re not sure if Caris & Co. meant to avoid giving a sell recommendation or not.
The problem with Cephalon, according to research firm Caris & Co., is that the late stage pipeline of products coming due may not boost revenue if sales of recently introduced Nuvigil are any indication. Combined with the fact that Provigil, which contributes 50% to Cephalon’s revenue stream, is due to face patent expiration in April of 2012 and we’ve got a recipe for disaster. Caris & Co also feels that the three pipeline drugs (Lupuzor, Cinquil and CEP-33237) hold no promise for either treatment or commercial value.  Adding to the caustic mix of diminishing sales from existing products and sub par pipeline are two court cases (Fentora and Amrix) which are likely not to go Cephalon’s way.
Not to be outdone, on February 15, 2011, a Jefferies & Co. analyst downgraded Cephalon to “Underperform” from “Buy”(article here). With the current price of CEPH going for around $58, it was shocking that the Jefferies analyst didn’t indicate that the stock should be sold considering that he (Corey Davis) has a target price of $48 instead of the previous price of $77.
If Mr. Davis feels so confident that CEPH is really worth 17% less than the current price why would it merely “underperfom” one day when only the day before it was indicated to possibly rise by 32%. With a spread of 60% in his change of opinion, it becomes challenging to believe Mr. Davis isn’t parroting the downgrade given by Caris & Co. that had such a large impact on stock price on February 11th.
Although we know how hard it is for some research and investment firms to actually say sell, the timing of these calls couldn’t be more poorly selected. Even if the stock were to accomplish the $48 level, it is too little too late. Investors needed to know that at $72 (52-week high) the stock was overpriced. Telling us that things won’t go well now is a slap in the face to some who possibly bought the stock at much higher levels. Our sell recommendation of Cephalon at $71 in early March 2010 (article here) was only rivaled by our initial speculative observation at $57 in late August 2009 (article here).
Since Cephalon is so close to the low and the negativity is running so high, we decided to run some numbers to see what the worst case scenario could be if the company were to actually survive (by the way, we think it will.)
According to Value Line dated January 14, 2011, the book value for Cephalon in 2009 was $30.19. Prior to the recession that began in 2007, Cephalon had its lowest price-to-book (P/B) ratio at 2.66 back in 2003. At that time, Cephalon had a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 23.
Currently, Cephalon is selling for 11 times earnings and if the stock price were to match the P/B of 2003 then CEPH would be selling for $80. If we assume that Cephalon can only accomplish half of the $80 target, then the stock should rise to $69 or 19% above the current level.
On a cash flow basis, Value Line estimated the cash flow for 2010 to be $8.55 per share. Based on the average low price-to-cash flow (P/CF) over the last three years, the stock should be trading at $67.29. If considered on the lowest level of the high range in the P/CF over the last three years, CEPH would be selling for $72.85. The last 3 years are utterly the lowest on a relative basis making comparisons over this period the most conservative possible.
All of the scenarios indicated above assume that Cephalon doesn’t find a way to increase their earnings going forward. Since the big name analysts are in agreement that this company is dead on arrival, we feel this company is worth a balanced second opinion. If for some reason the analysts are right about this company, then the downside target or downside risk is that the stock would fall to $51.63. However, considering the speculative nature of this selection (as with all Nasdaq 100 stocks) we prefer that CEPH occupy only a small portion of the portfolio while accepting at least 50% losses.

Article Links:

 

Please revisit New Low Observer for edits and revisions to this post. Email us.