Sometimes I read a lot of arguements and disputes about who right and who is wrong.
I summarised these people into 3
1)Too much historical FA. HFA
2)Balance Approach- Future and Valuation. BL
3)Simplified Future. SF
There is one group of people who like Historical Fundamental Analysis. Talking abou net asset per share, PE ratio, dividend, cash, etc. Mostly about historical.
If a company PE ratio is super low, 4 times, a good buy. But what if the profit drop next two years? You may lose money.
If the asset worth RM10 per share, now selling at RM6 per share, good buy. But if profit keep dropping or no increase, we may not make money. Unless we are the owner, we buy at RM6 and then sell the whole company at RM10.
They will show you numbers, then numbers and lastly numbers until your kepala pening "headache".
Don't get me wrong. All these are important. But we should spend more time thinking and searching info about the future. Nobody know about the future. You are half right. If your son is in Form 3, next year in the Future he will be in form 4. But sometimes unforeseen things happen. He decided to stop studying and concentrate on badminton and you got it wrong. We don't know 100% about the future but we can forecast based on information that we have.
Balance. These group of people talk more about future, eg icon sifu. Most of the info he shared are about future, the project, the expansion, the new orders, etc. He shared details things of future. He uses and also shares past records eg profit margin, but is for the purpose of analysing the trend, future and worth. Focus mainly on future. But he doesn't stop there, he also values the stock, whether the current price are expensive. Example no point buying a stock if the profit will grow 100% but the share price is already up 300%. That's why he also touches on PE ratio etc.
Analysts are the same. They forecast and they value. That is why in research report only few simple tables showing some important figures and forecast. They don't much much about ROI, net asset per share, etc.
For me, this is the best approach.
Some just said the stock is good if the profit is growing. This is too simiplied. That is why you can see many stocks 3 months later announce profit up 90% but the share price hardly move within this 3 months, because the stock price already up or PE ratio already very high.
Just Vitamin C is not enough, that's why we need multivitamin.
I have attended a 2 full days course on fundamental, it did not benefit me much because they focus too much on cash, dividend, current ratio, etc. I thought that was just one topic, maybe Level 2 talk about Future. I went to chat with them, that's all, they just invest based in historical fundamental. The tutor was also quite surprise on the high % gain my friend made in 2013. I know why, because they focus too much on dividend and stable stock, their return per year will not be high.
Investment is about Future and Valuation. Not just future and not just valuation.
Not to say I am "Mr Know It All", I don't know all and I am learning. But because lack of time, I don't really read those just talk mainly on fundamental. Because I only have 24 hours a day, I focus on those who talk about Future and Valuation.
With this would like to thank all analysts and those who contribution information generously.