Read This Before You Buy JB Foods Limited (SGX:BEW) Because Of Its P/E Ratio
This analysis is intended to introduce important early concepts to people who are starting to invest and want to begin learning about how to value company based on its current earnings and what are the drawbacks of this method.
JB Foods Limited (SGX:BEW) trades with a trailing P/E of 4.6x, which is lower than the industry average of 14x. While BEW might seem like an attractive stock to buy, it is important to understand the assumptions behind the P/E ratio before you make any investment decisions. Today, I will break down what the P/E ratio is, how to interpret it and what to watch out for.
Check out our latest analysis for JB Foods
Breaking down the P/E ratio
P/E is often used for relative valuation since earnings power is a chief driver of investment value. By comparing a stock’s price per share to its earnings per share, we are able to see how much investors are paying for each dollar of the company’s earnings.
P/E Calculation for BEW
Price-Earnings Ratio = Price per share ÷ Earnings per share
BEW Price-Earnings Ratio = $0.44 ÷ $0.0956 = 4.6x
The P/E ratio isn’t a metric you view in isolation and only becomes useful when you compare it against other similar companies. We preferably want to compare the stock’s P/E ratio to the average of companies that have similar features to BEW, such as capital structure and profitability. One way of gathering a peer group is to use firms in the same industry, which is what I’ll do. At 4.6, BEW’s P/E is lower than its industry peers (14). This implies that investors are undervaluing each dollar of BEW’s earnings. This multiple is a median of profitable companies of 16 Food companies in SG including Oceanus Group, Sino Grandness Food Industry Group and Hanwell Holdings. You can think of it like this: the market is suggesting that BEW is a weaker business than the average comparable company.
Assumptions to watch out for
Before you jump to conclusions it is important to realise that our assumptions rests on two assertions. The first is that our “similar companies” are actually similar to BEW, or else the difference in P/E might be a result of other factors. For example, if you are comparing lower risk firms with BEW, then its P/E would naturally be lower than its peers, as investors would value those with lower risk at a higher price. The second assumption that must hold true is that the stocks we are comparing BEW to are fairly valued by the market. If this does not hold, there is a possibility that BEW’s P/E is lower because our peer group is overvalued by the market.
What this means for you:
Since you may have already conducted your due diligence on BEW, the undervaluation of the stock may mean it is a good time to top up on your current holdings. But at the end of the day, keep in mind that relative valuation relies heavily on critical assumptions I’ve outlined above. Remember that basing your investment decision off one metric alone is certainly not sufficient. There are many things I have not taken into account in this article and the PE ratio is very one-dimensional. If you have not done so already, I highly recommend you to complete your research by taking a look at the following:
Future Outlook: What are well-informed industry analysts predicting for BEW’s future growth? Take a look at our free research report of analyst consensus for BEW’s outlook.
Past Track Record: Has BEW been consistently performing well irrespective of the ups and downs in the market? Go into more detail in the past performance analysis and take a look at the free visual representations of BEW’s historicals for more clarity.
Other High-Performing Stocks: Are there other stocks that provide better prospects with proven track records? Explore our free list of these great stocks here.
To help readers see past the short term volatility of the financial market, we aim to bring you a long-term focused research analysis purely driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis does not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements.
The author is an independent contributor and at the time of publication had no position in the stocks mentioned. For errors that warrant correction please contact the editor at editorial-team@simplywallst.com.
