This week we take a look at Chesapeake Energy Corporation (NYSE:CHK) starting today with an analysis of the company’s fundamentals. Our analysis later this week will cover our assessment of its likely Corporate Actions, Dividend Quality, and Earnings Quality.
For details on how CapitalCube computes the Fundamental Analysis Score of a company read here. Our analysis is peer-based; we used the following peer set for analyzing Chesapeake: Anadarko Petroleum Corporation (NYSE:APC), EOG Resources, Inc. (NYSE:EOG), Apache Corporation (NYSE:APA), Devon Energy Corporation (NYSE:DVN), Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE:WMB), Noble Energy, Inc. (NYSE:NBL), Hess Corp. (NYSE:HES) and EQT Corporation (NYSE:EQT).
If you are logged-in then you can change the default peer set (shown on the right) by either adding a new peer in the circled box or deleting any peers you don’t want by simply removing the checked peers. When you re-run the analysis Chesapeake will be scored and analyzed with your new custom peer set.
Fundamental Analysis NYSE:CHK)" src="http://www.capitalcube.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/FA-Score-CHK.png" width="195" height="34" />
- Chesapeake Energy Corporation (NYSE:CHK trades at a lower Price/Book multiple (0.9) than its peer median (1.8).
- Chesapeake Energy Corporation (NYSE:CHK looks challenged given its below median EBITDA-based returns and the market’s low expectations of its growth.
- CHK-US has relatively low profit margins and median asset efficiency.
- Compared with its chosen peers, the company’s annual revenues and earnings change at a slower rate, implying a lack of strategic focus and/or lack of execution success.
- CHK-US’s return on assets currently and over the past five years has trailed the peer median and suggests the company might be operationally challenged relative to its peers.
- The company’s relatively low gross and pre-tax margins suggest a non-differentiated product portfolio and not much control on operating costs relative to peers.
- While CHK-US’s revenue growth in recent years has been above the peer median, the stock’s Price/EBITDA ratio is less than the peer median suggesting that the company’s earnings may be peaking and the market expects a decline in its growth expectations.
- The company’s relatively low level of capital investment and below peer median returns on capital suggest that the company is in maintenance mode.
- CHK-US’s operating performance may not allow it to raise additional debt.
Company numbers are TTM (trailing twelve months) or latest available. Share price data is previous day’s close unless otherwise stated.
Share Price Performance
Relative underperformance over the last year and the last month suggest a lagging position.
Chesapeake Energy Corporation (NYSE:CHK
’s share price performance of -24.7% for the last 12 months is below its peer median. The 30-day trend in its share price performance of -1.5% is also below the peer median implying that the company’s stock performance is lagging its peers.
)" src="http://www.capitalcube.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Share-Price-Performance-bfe62b32bd6c259b5593318c258a1776-300x225.png" width="300" height="225" />
Drivers of Valuation: Operations or Expectations?
Valuation (P/B) = Operating Advantage (ROE) * Growth Expectations (P/E)
Price/Book or P/B valuation is a function of the observed operating performance of the company as measured by ROE multiplied by the market’s current implied growth expectation as measured by the P/E. We define Valuation Premium as the difference between the Market Capitalization and Book Value of Equity, and as a proxy for the NPV of cash-flow associated to the Book Equity investment.
Based on the analysis of the relative contribution to the P/B valuation of “Operations ROE” vs. “Expectations P/E”, we quickly garner insight into peers comparative performance and the market’s assessment of their strategies – are they just “Harvesting” the current business pipeline or are investors betting on a strategic “Turnaround”?
CHK-US has a challenged profile relative to peers.
CHK-US’s PE multiple is negative now so EBITDA ratios provide better peer comparisons. CHK-US’s performance looks relatively challenged because of its below median returns (EBITDA return on equity of 22.8% compared to the peer median of 33.5%) and the market’s relatively low expectations of its growth (Price to Ebitda multiple of 3.7 compared to peer median of 5.3). The company trades at a lower Price/Book multiple of 0.9 compared to its peer median of 1.8.
)" src="http://www.capitalcube.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Valuation-Drivers-975415c48a4401ccb02c684efdfa684c-300x225.png" width="300" height="225" />
CHK-US has relatively low profit margins and median asset efficiency.
The company’s profit margins are below peer median (currently -5.7% vs. peer median of 9.9%) while its asset efficiency is about median (asset turns of 0.2x compared to peer median of 0.2x).
CHK-US has moved to a relatively low net margin from a relatively high net margin profile at the recent year-end.
CHK-US’s net margin continues to trend downward and is below (but within one standard deviation of) its five-year average net margin of -2.8%. The decrease in its net margin to -5.7% from 16.6% (in 2011) was also accompanied by a decrease in its peer median during this period to 9.9% from 12.4%. Net margin fell 19.7 percentage points relative to peers (and is now also lower than its peer median).
CHK-US’s asset turnover is downward trending and is now similar to its five-year average asset turnover of 0.3. Though its asset turnover has remained relatively stable at 0.2 compared to 2011, its peer median has decreased to 0.2 from 0.3 during this period. Overall, asset turnover and net margin trends suggest that CHK-US’s ROA at -1.4% has maintained its downward trend and is below (but within one standard deviation of) its five-year average ROA of -0.1%.
)" src="http://www.capitalcube.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Net-Margin-39ac26f8ca6ea45a238e55eb6f62c7c0-300x248.png" width="300" height="248" />
)" src="http://www.capitalcube.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Sales-Total-Assets-x-74079920840d64bdb28d017299b0920f-300x248.png" width="300" height="248" />
Lagging revenues and earnings imply a lack of strategic focus and/or ability to execute.
Changes in the company’s annual top line and earnings (12.0% and -1.8% respectively) generally lag its peers. This implies a lack of strategic focus and/or inability to execute. We view such companies as laggards relative to peers.
)" src="http://www.capitalcube.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Earnings-Leverage-c1b8744746bba5cd0537fe5dd4695cb7-300x225.png" width="300" height="225" />
Sustainability of Returns
CHK-US’s relative returns suggest that the company has operating challenges.
CHK-US’s return on assets is less than its peer median currently (-1.4% vs. peer median 2.6%). It has also had less than peer median returns on assets over the past five years (-0.06% vs. peer median 3.5%). This performance suggests that the company has persistent operating challenges relative
About the author