Monday, December 21, 2009, 4:23AM ET - U.S. Markets open in 5 hours and 7 minutes.

David Jackson The Green Investor

David Jackson, The Green Investor

Two Sweet Spots in Ethanol Investing

by David Jackson

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story
Good (109 Ratings)
2.642208/5
Posted on Monday, March 3, 2008, 12:00AM

My last column looked at the case for ethanol, and concluded that every one of the three leading types of ethanol by source (corn, sugar, and bio-waste) has advantages and challenges.

This time, I'm going to look in more detail at two ethanol stocks: small cap Pacific Ethanol and large cap Cosan.

A Small Cap Play on Corn Ethanol

Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (PEIX) produces and markets corn-based ethanol primarily in the western United States. It owns ethanol production facilities near the point of consumption in California, Colorado, and Oregon, believing that this will give it a competitive advantage as the cost of transporting ethanol is higher than the cost of transporting corn.

Corn-based ethanol was the darling of investors through mid-2006, and Pacific Ethanol rode that enthusiasm to a peak of $42 a share. Now, with the stock trading between $5 and $6, the company has a market cap of not much more than $200 million.

Pacific Ethanol COO John Miller outlined the company's strategy on a conference call with analysts: "Our strategy consists of growing our market share and keeping our total sales well ahead of our production volume. Then we add low-cost production capacity in locations where we believe we have a sustainable economic advantage."

Corn Up, Ethanol Down

Adding production capacity doesn't seem to be a problem. Pacific Ethanol says it's on track to expand its annual production capacity to 220 million gallons this year and 420 million gallons in 2010. PEIX booked 2006 revenues of $226 million, and that should jump to over $450 million for 2007 when final results are reported.

The company's challenge lies in the "sustainable economic advantage" part of its strategy. Sure, producing ethanol close to where it's consumed reduces transport costs. But Pacific Ethanol, like other companies that produce ethanol from corn, is facing more serious economic challenges: Its profit margins are caught in the vise of rising corn prices and falling ethanol prices.

On the conference call I quoted from above, for example, the company described how its cost of corn rose 7 percent between the second and third quarters of 2007 (from $4.23 per bushel to $4.54), while the price it received for the ethanol it produced fell on concerns of a supply glut.

Pacific Ethanol is upbeat about future demand for ethanol: "We continue to believe that the economic and environmental imperatives will drive new demand for ethanol steadily towards 10 percent ethanol volume in all U.S. gasoline over the next several years. We were also encouraged by recent comments from Energy Secretary Bodman that the country needs to move towards higher level blends between 12 percent and 20 percent by volume to help address the severe energy challenges ahead." Dramatically higher demand would likely boost the price of ethanol.

True Believers Only

But the stock is hard to value. Analyst consensus is that Pacific Ethanol will lose $0.07 this year on over $700 million in revenue. It's hard to project how profitable the company will be in future years, since so much depends on government policy (including subsidies for ethanol) and the future price of corn.

If you're a believer in corn-based ethanol, and think that government policy will drive huge increases in ethanol consumption and corn prices will fall, PEIX is likely a buy now. The time to buy stocks is before the good news hits, when sentiment is negative.

However, if you share the concerns about corn-based ethanol outlined in my last column, or doubt whether government policy will promote corn-based ethanol, or think that high corn prices may rise further, Pacific Ethanol is a risky bet.

Rising to the Challenge

Perhaps in recognition of the challenges facing corn-based ethanol, Pacific Ethanol is moving into cellulosic ethanol. Along with two partners, it received a matching grant of $24.32 million from the U.S. Department of Energy to build the first cellulosic ethanol plant in the northwestern United States. The plant will produce ethanol from wheat straw, wood chips, and corn stover.

But before you get too excited about PEIX's expansion into cellulosic ethanol, remember that the cellulosic ethanol production technology for the new plant was developed by BioGasol ApS, not Pacific Ethanol. Also, the plant won't be completed until the fourth quarter of 2009.

If you want to research PEIX in more depth, start with unfiltered information straight from the source: the most recent transcript of the company's conference call with analysts. You'll be able to read the company's own description of its business, the short-term challenges it faces, and the issues that concern the analysts who follow the stock.

A Large Cap Play on Sugar and Sugar-Based Ethanol

Brazil-based Cosan Group is the largest grower and processor of sugarcane in the world, the largest ethanol producer in Brazil (and the second largest in the world), and the largest sugar producer in Brazil (and one of the three largest sugar producers in the world).

Last April, Cosan created a new parent company listed on the New York Stock Exchange with a superior level of corporate governance and compliance with Sarbanes Oxley, and also SEC supervision. That company, Cosan Ltd. (CZZ), has a market cap of $2.9 billion and had 2007 revenues of $1.68 billion.

The company operates 17 mills, 2 refineries, 2 port facilities, and numerous warehouses. These facilities are located in the southern-central region of Brazil, which is one of the world's most productive sugarcane regions.

Trends and Questions

Cosan identifies four trends in its favor:

• Increasing global demand for ethanol.

• Increasing global sugar market opportunities, as demand for sugar rises in developing countries and developed markets gradually drop their price protections.

• Further consolidation of sugar producers in Brazil.

• Strong future demand for alternative energy in Brazil.

A key question for investors in Cosan: Is this stock more leveraged to sugar or to ethanol?

A Sweet Rebound

After a tough 2007, during which excessive global output led to a collapse, the price of sugar is now rising. Surpluses are shrinking, and production capacity is being taken offline where it's uneconomical. Agricultural commodity prices are generally rising, and hedge funds perceive sugar as a particularly undervalued commodity.

Gary Dorsch, one of the smartest commentators on global investing, says, "Fund managers are pouring billions of dollars into commodities across the board, as a hedge against the explosive growth of the world's money supply, competitive currency devaluations, and the negative interest rates engineered by central banks. To the chagrin of central bankers, much of new money pumped into the global markets is also going into commodities, instead of the stock market."

Yet even with rising sugar prices, Cosan is focused on profiting from ethanol rather than from sugar. Cosan purchases 40 percent of the sugarcane that it uses to produce ethanol and sugar from third-party sugarcane growers, so Cosan would suffer from a rise in sugarcane prices.

Remember that ethanol production from sugarcane has higher energy efficiency than ethanol produced from other feedstocks. Ethanol from sugarcane has an energy output/input ratio of 8.3 versus 1.9 for sugar beets, 1.3 to 1.8 for corn, and 1.2 for wheat. And sugarcane has the highest ethanol productivity per hectare among currently commercially viable renewable fuel feedstocks.

Bouncing Back, for Now

In its October earnings call, Cosan indicated that it's using its "maximum capacity to produce ethanol," as it believes that "ethanol prices vis-a-vis sugar prices will be more attractive to us in this inter-season."

Bear Stearns analyst Marc McCarthy argues that "Cosan, having bounced from its lows, is unmatched in size, liquidity, management strength, and corporate structure." Cosan's stock has risen from a 52-week low in November of $9.53 to about $14.50. The stock now has a trailing P/E of about 18.

What could go wrong? Like other agricultural producers, Cosan is exposed to weather and other environmental risks. Sugar demand should grow as developing countries become wealthier, but in developed countries artificial sweeteners may reduce demand for sugar. Moreover, despite the fact that it trades on the NYSE, Cosan is a Brazilian company. In the past, investors in Brazil have worried about political and economic stability and risk of devaluation. (Much of Cosan's revenue is billed in Brazilian currency, so a devaluation of the real would hit the dollar-denominated stock.)

If you want to research Cosan further, here are two must-read sources: The prospectus for Cosan's NYSE listing describes its business in detail and is a great primer on sugar and sugar-based ethanol. And the transcript of Cosan's most recent conference call provides an update on the company's business and strategy, and a Q-and-A session with analysts.

Email this Page IM this StoryBookmark this StoryAdd to your Del.icio.us accountDigg this StoryPrint this Story

Rate This story

Good (109 Ratings)
2.5/5
Sign-in to rate!

50 Comments

Showing comments 6-35 of 50<< PreviousNext >>
Sort: first to last

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Sunday, July 27, 2008, 7:51PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Cosan: superior corporate governance?? It has a terrible history of corporate governance, particularly versus minority shareholder interests, all you have to do is research actions by the Brazilian SEC, the CVM, and numerous shareholder actions. You neglected to mention the slight issue of US tariffs on Brazil ethanol and sugar, which will not go away anytime soon, given the lobbying power of the local sugar and ethanol interests here. Also the numerous issues, environmental and otherwise, that Euro-land has with Brazil ethanol. Would not touch Cosan, much less Pacific Ethanol, with even less of a future.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, July 9, 2008, 11:58PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Doesn't it take more than a gallon of gas to produce a gallon of ethonal gas? The Oil Tri-opoly love's this logic. Electric cars and Nuclear Plants are the future and we waste our time burning our food supplies.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, July 2, 2008, 2:03PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Everyone is complaining about food prices now....imagine what they would be if we made fuel out of our crops. Solar is the way to go in my book....I've never known anyone to starve to death from sun energy. By the time it could even be offered commercially at gas stations food prices would be so astronomical no one would have the money to pay for the junk anyway! I sure would rather eat than drive...

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Saturday, June 21, 2008, 8:34PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    The US corn crop is already about half wiped out. This is coming at a time when there are major worldwide corn shortages. That is going to significantly raise corn prices, and corn based ethanol is becoming politically incorrect due to the fact it takes just about as much oil to produce the ethanol to replace the oil. I just don't see the subsidies rising enough to offset the corn price increases, to say nothing of the diversion of corn from the food supply. There may be some value to using Brazilian sugar based ethanol but we have high import taxes there. I don't see that tax being cut much, but even if it was, the result would be marginal as sugar prices and demand are also rising.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, June 3, 2008, 2:12PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Is he kidding? Investing in ethanol? Why not quit your job and just wait for the welfare payments. Subsidy is subsidy, no matter what it's wearing.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Monday, June 2, 2008, 10:47AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    until the fictional electiric car appears id rather invest in US corn and Brazilian sugar than terrorist oil thank you for the two names to watch

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, May 27, 2008, 9:11PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    Ethanol is certainly cheaper than regular fuel, but when you think about it, using ethanol is not "green" because it still relies on a fossil fuel: water. Making ethanol is VERY water intensive and we are exhausting our aquifers just as we have exhausted our oil reserves. We're swapping one problem for another and since water is essential to life, unlike petrol, I would rather not go that route. I would go for solar because, even though it's not terribly advanced yet, it is not water intensive, you can put the cells on your house, and it doesn't kill birds and bats like the wind turbines. They're pretty green in my book.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, April 16, 2008, 4:48PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    You should not be talking about investing in ethanol AT ALL as long as it is primarily based on consumable foodstuffs. Corn-based ethanol carries to little extra energy (one a 25-30% increase over the energy needed to create it) that it should never have been considered at all. And any foodstuff-based ethanol is going to have the negative impact of raising food prices dramatically. Investors should be steered to companies doing research into cellulose-based ethanol, which, while still struggling technologically, will be the only ethanol once it is viable. All these companies working with corn and sugar will be out of business as soon as cellulose-based ethanol is available, and you should invest for the long term.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Saturday, March 22, 2008, 11:50AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    nonsense! electric cars are the future, dont let anyone tell you different: zero emissions, recyclable batteries, e-z maintenance and infinite possibilities. all this squabble about "alternative" fuels really amounts to "alternative" conversation.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 19, 2008, 12:31AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    All this ethanol business is a boondoggle and utter crap. Ethanol subsidies should be ended immediately. Ethanol producing plants should be shut down immediately. It takes more energy to produce ethanol than the ethanol itself produces. One tank of ethanol would feed a person for a year. In a time of worldwide food shortages, and with food prices rising sharply, it is criminal to burn food in the gas tank of a car.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday, March 6, 2008, 6:00PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    Regarding the foreign exchange risk of Cosan, given the structural weakness of the dollar vs. real, any change in exchange rates are far more likely to increase rather than decrease the dollar value of Cosan shares. Brazil's foreign exchange reserves are more than 4 times those of the USA, in spite of having a much smaller economy, and they run a current account surplus. Cosan's refineries are energy self-sufficient (they burn the bagasse to generate their own power). The only potential downside is if the price of gasoline in Brazil goes back to where it was 10 years ago, and there's not much chance of that.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 9:41PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    Biofuels is one sector wherer the general public needs to educate and enlighten themselves. Now being a Reagan-era conservative, free market, pro--domestic energy, who believes that global warming is a politically motivated and driven. I believe that we as a country should go after the fossil fuels that are right here, both on land and under the sea off our shores. We need to allow new alternative energy sources (i,e, nuclear energy) to once again come into play and because biofuels appear to be here to stay, more media coverage and discussion needs to be given to companies such as Gulf Ethanol Corp., which unlike so many companies that are spoken of in the main stream media, has been on the forefront in the development and use of non-food based bio-materials, namely cellulose-based materials. I want to quote recent studies by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the University of Nebraska which found that cellulose feed stocks can produce 540% more energy than is consumed in their production. Corn ethanol has been criticized by some as energy inefficient because it produces only 25% more energy than it takes to make it. It also will have an impact on the consumer and the price of food based products. Cellulose changes the energy equation for ethanol production. At five times energy output to energy input will make ethanol a very efficient renewable fuel. And this (cellulose) from the most abundant material on the planet (about 33% of all plant material). I own several times as much stock in oil and oil exploration companies, but I have invested in companies such as Gulf Ethanol because they are on the cutting edge in developing alternative fuel sources, which has taken a material (cellulose) which can be derived from non-food crops such as saw-grass and sorghum. Although sorghum can be viewed marginally as a food-based crop, deriving the syrup from the plant is labor intensive. And as a current farm crop here in our country, it is a fraction in terms of the amount of corn is grown and consumed by consumers. Again, I am for fossil fuel exploration and production here in the United States and the need for updating and expanding the infrastructure to support this expansion. But when speaking of bio-fuel research and technology... the critics are correct to go after those that propose food-based bio-fuels as the energy savior. But at the same time it should be mention that there are home grown companies that are using their entrepreneurial spirit and Yankee know-how to establish their own niche in this energy-starved and politically driven effort to control our everyday life.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 7:15PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Cool

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 6:36PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    This one of the few articles on ethanol that even brings up the matter of net energy or "energy efficiency" as it was refered to. This is the very crux of the whole alternative energy thing. Not many people seem to realize that the math of EROEI makes any alternative to oil that operates with less than a ratio of about 3 useless because it winds up displacing just a small fraction of an oil barrel for each barrel of alternatice fuel produced. The displaced fraction drops exponentially as you go below the 3-4 level. So by the time you get to the 1.3 value of corn ethanol, you are displacing no oil at all! The corn frenzy is serving no purpose other than creating a food inflation debacle to go with our monetary inflation debacle and our peak oil inflation debacle. Sugarcane ethanol is about all we have with an EROEI anywhere near that of gasoline at around 8. Sugar is going to have to replace the other useless feedstocks. But this will still be causing the horrendous food inflation problem untill the high EROEI cellulose, switchgrass, and other feedstocks come out of the labs that aren't food and don't hog the same cropland used for our food supply. For transportation fuel, sugar is the only viable oil replacement to be used in the meantime.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 11:20AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    This ethanol for fuel idea is the dumbest idea to come out of government ever! The whole idea is to be energy independent right? Well, everyone knows ethanol will not even come close to doing that. What's wrong with buying oil form the middle east anyway? The whole world buys oil from the middle east. There is enough oil there to last another 100 years at current consumption and that's a conservative estimate. We have loads of oil here in the USA but are not allowed to touch it, completly stipid. So our great minds in Washington decide to make feeding the world 400% more expensive to do, not to mention the cost at the pump is more not less. It takes a lot of energy to produce ethonal then it makes gas engines run terrible. This idea is a lose lose situation. The best way to reduce our energy consumption is throught better engine design. Mandate all cars sold in America will get 50MPG inside 20 years and give the auto industry tax incentives to create the technology. Also, the Government should help pay for the R&D. This idea will benifit all instead of hurting all like the ethonal idea is doing. As far as Hybrids go, forget that idea. Create totally electric and natural gas engines. Natural gas is abundent in America and there are many natural gas vehicles on the road now and have been for almost 20 years. It's big oil who blocks this idea and buys up the patents on the engine designs. Mandate that idea and we can have a real plan for the future. Plus it is not a real problem to install natural gas pumps at the service stations, though we would need an attendant to dispense the fuel. Big deal!! We really do need a new direction here, the minds at work are backward and only trying to bandaid the problem. It really is a joke. The government has us paying coming and going. People need to educate themselves and stop wearing blinders on this issue.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 10:54AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    Investing caution is always advised when the only reason for the existence of a whole industry is government subsidies.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 10:48AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    Hooray for ethanol. 1) It makes your car get crappy gas mileage. 2) It's totally noneconomic, which means we pay for any profits made directly from tax dollars. 3) Our tax dollars are used to drive up food prices (both by direct consumption and by using arable land to grow gasoline) which then costs us more still at the grocery store 4) high food prices mean lots of poor people internationally starve to death 5) it's a grand social engineering project with the government havings its grubby inefficient fingers all over the economy... leading to less economic freedom and less free trade But what counts is clearly that it makes us feel good about ourselves vis-a-vis polar bears.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 9:16AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    Ethanol as a supplement to fossil fuel is a possible short term shot in the arm for the commodity. The commodity market is presently hot as equities die on the vine. This also helps. If you are looking to corn ethanol as a long term panacea for the energy crisis, you are fooling yourself. Be ready to jump out of this commodity quickly as the technology towards electric and hydrogen motor/engine powered vehicles become a reality. Corn's future is in food, chemicals, and medicine products. Not as a large scale permanaent fuel supplement.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 9:15AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 4/5

    It is good to be talking about alternative fuel.But,the the bottom line is demand for oil.Never mind O.P.E.C.,we can not refine more oil.Also,another additive can be made from switchgrass.Corn has thrown the whole agrculture market out of whack.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 8:21AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    article should have been condensed. far too wordy.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 8:13AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    what about this cellulosic ethanol development where corn is not used to make ethanol?

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 3:26AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    "What could go wrong?" - David Jackson Greed will, in the end, go wrong. Ethanol in its essence is environmentally, economically, and morally unacceptable. In a few months, you will swiftly and somewhat unexpectetdly realize that ethanol is not the answer. This will happen when enviro-nazis, who at first championed ethanol as a viable alternative to oil, realize that Brazil is clearing rainforests, and all of its species, in the name of sugar-for-ethanol. This will happen when oil reaches $125 per barrel because OPEC continues to feel threatened by an alternative source of fuel. This will happen when your greed causes millions around the world to die the most horrible death fathomable, the slow death of starvation, because you put your money in ethanol grains that were diverted from feeding real people. Can you live with that on your concsience?

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 2:48AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    As a physical chemist who is familiar with this subject, several of the comments made above regarding why ethanol is not viable are clearly from people who are not familiar with the subject but who think they are. Hydrogen is not an energy source. Using ethanol as a fuel does not violate thermodynamics - the energy comes from the Sun through photosynthesis. What is true is that there may be little to no energy gain after processing the ethanol (which has nothing to do with the criticism above). Ethanol's possible success will depend on economics. If we need more food, we'll grow it. Food prices may be affected in the short term as supply strives to meet demand. As per the companies, the information given was valuable as to how these companies operate so one can decide whether to invest or not. The lack of stock ownership disclosure is unfortunate. It was worthwhile pointing out that much of the worth of these stocks will depend upon government policies. [ Cashman100000 said: "Anyone who has taken thermodynamics/physics konws you cannot get more energy out than you put in a process. To even mention an ethanol stock as an investment is outrageous. Maybe you should write for penthouse magazine because that seems more level." Perhaps Cashman100000 is the one who needs to stick to his/her own level.]

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 10:10PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    I accidentally gave one star. I thought this was just another blawg summary. After reading the article I was pleasantly surprised to find original thought. I should have give four stars.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 9:33PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    The only thing ethanol is good for is driving up the price of corn regardless of whether it goes into your car or your stomach. Ethanol is inefficient so you end up using (and therefore buying) more gas, so what's the point? I doubt any savings in oil offset what we are putting into ethanol to stretch it out. You would be better off investing in oil reclamation. What I would really like to see some serious advances in hydrogen fuel cells. I havent' heard anything recently in that regard.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 8:31PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Anyone that has taken thermodynamics/physics knows you cannot get more energy out than you put in a process. To even mention an ethanol stock as an investment is outrageous. Maybe you should write for penthouse magazine because that seems more your level.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 3:39PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Ethanol takes almost as much energy to produce as you get from it using corn. Without government subsidies there is no profit to be made from ethanol production, it will be a bust once people figure this out.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 3:17PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    I would be very cautious about any ethanol produced from edible crops, especially given the high food prices today and the looming food crisis in the third world.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 2:56PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Ethanol is bogus.Our farm acreage is far too valuable to waste on this enviromentalist pipe dream.Nuclear power is plentiful,proven, and practical.Ethanol investment will soon be a footnote in the history of folly.

  • Yahoo! Finance User - Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 2:45PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    I agree with the post about going to Atlantic City! Here is an interesting story regarding the truth about ethanol. Follow the ethanol bandwagon with caution. http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/apr2006/bw20060427_493909.htm

Showing comments 6-35 of 50<< PreviousNext >>

More from Seeking Alpha

The Leading Provider of Stock Market Opinion and Analysis

Seeking Alpha is the leading provider of stock market opinion and analysis from blogs, money managers, and investment newsletters, and a producer of its own financial content on market-moving news developments.

Read more from Seeking Alpha here.

More from Yahoo! Sources

  • CNN Money
  • Consumer Reports
  • Kiplinger
  • The Motley Fool
  • Business Week
  • Wall Street Journal

Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data and daily updates provided by Morningstar, Inc. Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes. Real-Time continuous streaming quotes are available through our premium service. You may turn streaming quotes on or off. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.

Yahoo! Answers is provided for informational purposes only, and no Q&A is intended for trading or investing purposes. Yahoo! shall not be responsible or liable for the accuracy, usefulness or availability of any Q&A information, and shall not be responsible or liable for any trading or investment decisions based on such information. View Complete Answers Disclaimer.