CELG 0.7 PEG vs 1.6 AMGN/1.1 BIIB. CELG 2016 PEG 0.4 (0.3 on REAL numbers) 60%-70% off for best EPS growth....
New ISI #'s out - 2013 CELG PEG is 0.7 vs 1.6-1.1 for AMGN & BIIB. PEG is 0.6/0.5 x for '14/'15. (In 2015 less than half of AMGN's 1.3 / much lower than BIIB & CELG EPS conservative). 2016 PEG is 0.4. (.30 PEG w real numbers imo)...
CRAZY CHEAP EARNINGS GROWTH EVEN AT 102 - TOUGH TO BELIEVE BIG PHARMA IS NOT LOOKING AT THIS POST APREMILAST, POMALIDOMIDE AND PANCREATIC CANCER DATA.
WHAT IS OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE IS THAT EVEN AFTER THIS RUN TO 102 THIS STOCK IS VERY VERY UNDER-PRICED FOR 25% EARNINGS GROWTH, ONE OF THE HIGHEST EPS GROWTH RATES NOT JUST IN HEALTHCARE AND BIOTECH SECTORS, BUT IN THE ENTIRE S&P 500
Company 2013-2014-2015-2016 (OUT YESTERDAY FROM ISI)
AMGN 1.6x 1.4x 1.3x 1.3x
CELG 0.7x 0.6x 0.5x 0.4x (Based on EPS that is $1.00+ low imo)
FYI, rob-cos, there was a story this morning (10:36 EDT) from the staff of Stockpickr (The Street?) . . . in any case, the crux of the text was this: "Yet it’s the profit outlook that should give you pause. Celgene is expected to earn roughly $5 a share in 2013 (on a GAAP basis) and around $6 a share in 2014, implying a 2014 multiple of around 16. Trouble is, further profit gains will become harder to achieve as many of this company’s current top-selling drugs will increasingly be exposed to generic competition. It’s that patent cliff that many drugmakers face that explains why many of them trade closer to 10 times projected profits.
Analysts at Goldman Sachs prefer to value Celgene against discounted cash flows and think fair value is around $88, or roughly $10 below current levels." Maybe this -- more than any misinterpretation of the buyback strategy -- was the cause of today's downdraft.