80% of companies are beating earnings expectations this quarter--so why do I think we've got an earnings problem?

04/29/2011 8:30 am EST


Jim Jubak

Founder and Editor, JubakPicks.com

So far it’s been a troubling U.S. earnings season.

Troubling? When 80% of the companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 that have reported first quarter 2011 earnings have come in above Wall Street projections. (That’s above the 72% of companies in the fourth quarter of 2010 and the 76% in the third quarter.) When many companies from all over the economy haven’t just beaten expectations but blown them out of the water? Cummins (CMI), a maker of truck engines, reported earnings 31cents a share above Wall Street estimates. That’s 22% above Wall Street projections. Apple (AAPL) beat projections by $1.03 a share, or 19%. Timken (TKR), a maker of ball bearings and other specialty steel products, beat projections by 31%.

Earnings problems?

Well, yes. If you look not just at the numbers for this quarter but at how companies achieved those numbers, then, yes, this stock market has an earnings problem. If you look at the trends in this quarters numbers on things like the cost of goods sold, then, yes, this market has an earnings problem.

Let me demonstrate with some very concrete examples.

On April 27, Whirlpool, (WHR), the world’s biggest appliance maker, reported earnings of $2.17 a share. Wall Street analysts had expected just $1.16.

So where did this 87% earnings surprise come from?

Not out of revenue. Revenue for the quarter climbed by just 3%.

Not out of operating income. Operating income actually declined to $221 million for the quarter from $287 million in the first quarter of 2010.

How about out of the tax code?

The company received a net income tax benefit of $24 million in the first quarter of 2011, up from $3 million in the first quarter of 2010. The company received more in energy tax credits, renewed as part of the December lame duck budget deal, than it had expected.

For 2011 the company expects to receive between $300 million and $350 million in energy tax credits. That’s up from the $300 million the company estimated in February.

Investors should be asking what happens after 2011, though, since the energy tax credit was extended only for a year in December 2010 and is proving to be considerably more expensive than Congress had initially projected. (Although maybe since it’s a “tax benefit” rather than “spending,” it will survive the budget cuts looming for fiscal 2012.)

Whirlpool, in fact, has had a negative effective income tax rate for 2010, 2009, and 2008. In 2010, for example, the company reported a negative tax rate of 10.9% and a tax benefit of $64 million.

Nice money if you can get it. And Whirlpool certainly isn’t the only company to get it. General Electric (GE), for example, got a tax benefit of $3.2 billion in 2010 and recorded a profit of $14.2 billion.

But I’d argue that a boost to earnings from taxes isn’t as valuable to investors as an increase in operating profit. The boost from taxes is dependent on the hard work of lobbyists and the vagaries of Washington politics, and to the ups and downs of the business cycle. (Taxes go down when companies apply the losses from a recession to the profits made during the early part of a recovery.) I’ve seen a lot of earnings reports so far this quarter that noted a lower than expected tax rate—Intel (INTC), to take another example, reported a tax rate of 27.7% in the first quarter against a projection of a 29% rate—and I really don’t want to depend on those lower rates for earnings growth in the rest of 2011 and in 2012.

The other problem that I’m seeing in this quarter’s earnings comes from companies that are reporting that they expect higher energy and raw materials costs in the rest of 2011. Higher costs are nothing new this quarter—they’ve been going up for a while—but what I’m seeing in this quarter’s earnings reports is new admissions that companies are going to have to start passing on these costs to customers by raising prices.

And that introduces new uncertainty about how higher prices might lower sales growth.

For example, Coca Cola missed Wall Street estimates of 87 cents a share by a penny when it reported on April 26. That’s not at all bad given the rising cost of commodities such as sugar that the company had seen during the quarter. Coke ran a very smart hedging operation in the quarter, if I can judge from the earnings report, which produced a penny a share gain, which will be included in future quarters.

The problem came in the conference call where the company admitted that it probably wouldn’t be able to hold the line on prices later this year because of rising commodity prices. The company would probably have to raise prices by 3% to 4% on some brands and on others it would hold prices steady but reduce bottle size.

McDonald’s (MCD) said essentially the same thing in its April 21 conference call. In the first quarter the cost of the U.S. basket of goods that the company uses to track costs climbed by about 1%.  That kind of moderate increase in prices won’t last, though, McDonald’s said. For all of 2011 the company is expecting an increase of 4% to 4.5%, with greater cost pressure in the second and third quarters. The 4% to 4.5% range is an increase from the company’s estimate of a 2% to 2.5% cost increase that the company issued back with it December quarter earnings report.

One likely consequence, the company said: price increases. (Sure glad that Ben Bernanke and the Fed say that there’s no inflation in the United States.)

Of course, the problem isn’t limited to food companies. In its earnings report Union Pacific (UNP) said that higher fuel prices had cut 8 cents a share off first quarter earnings. The company paid an average of $2.88 as gallon for diesel fuel in the period. That was up 33% from the first quarter of 2010.

Trucking company Arkansas Best (ABFS) reported a first quarter 2011 loss of 51 cents a share that was, partly, the result of fuel costs that rose so quickly in the last weeks of the quarter that the company’s fuel surcharges couldn’t keep up.

Do I need to tell you that shippers of all kinds are raising their fuel fees? No telling, however, if those charges will be able to keep up with fuel prices or if they might convince some customers slow their traffic.

I’d describe what I’m seeing in first quarter earnings reports at many companies as an erosion of earnings quality and an increase in earnings uncertainty. Not for all companies. If you look at the first quarter earnings report for a Cummins (CMI), the numbers are rock solid and the uncertainty actually less than in the fourth quarter of 2010. (For my take on Cummins’ earnings report see my post http://jubakpicks.com/2011/04/27/update-cummins-cmi-7/)

The overall effect, though, is a narrowing of the number of companies that I see delivering better than expected earnings numbers and first rate earnings quality.

Technical analysts look to various measures of market breadth to answer these questions about the health of a rally. For example, it’s a good sign, a sign of increasing strength in a rally, if the number of advancing stocks out numbers the number of declining stocks. And it’s an ever better sign if the ratio of advancing to declining stocks is climbing. Or to take another instance, it’s a good sign if the number of stocks hitting new 52-week highs exceeds the number hitting new 52-week lows.  (Just for the record, the technical analysts I read report that the advance/decline line, which tracks the ratio of advancing to declining stocks, shows that the market still falls into the bullish camp.)

What I’m describing in my take on first quarter earnings is a kind of fundamental version of those breadth indicators. And right now what I’m seeing are signs that fundamental breadth is narrowing. That’s probably the big story of the current first quarter earnings season so far.

The narrowing of fundamental breadth isn’t so rapid that it threatens the bullish momentum in the U.S. market. At least not as long as the Federal Reserve can engineer historically low interest rates. But investors should pay attention to this narrowing and it should guide your selection of individual stocks and sectors. If you pay attention to the falling quality and the rising uncertainty of this quarter’s earning numbers, you find fewer companies to invest in, that’s true. But that isn’t as bad thing at this point in the rally. It will increase the quality of your portfolio, lower your risk, and make you more cautious in general.

And that’s a good attitude to have as we head into the uncertainties of a summer that will see the Fed end its QE2 program of buying Treasuries, the prospects for slowing U.S. growth, and greater worries over inflation.

Full disclosure: I don’t own shares of any of the companies mentioned in this post in my personal portfolio. The mutual fund I manage, Jubak Global Equity Fund, may or may not now own positions in any stock mentioned in this post. The fund owned shares of Cummins and Timken as of the end of March. For a full list of the stocks in the fund as of the end of March see the fund’s portfolio at http://jubakfund.com/about-the-fund/holdings/

  By clicking submit, you agree to our privacy policy & terms of service.

Related Articles on STOCKS

Keyword Image
Retail Sector is a Short
3 hours ago

The December retail sales report was a disaster, notes Landon Whaley, who recommends shorting the SP...

Keyword Image
2 Ways to Bet on BDCs
4 hours ago

Business development companies (BDCs) lend money to private companies in the form of fixed and varia...