This research report contains quantitative financial analysis and qualitative strategic discovery of two very different companies namely Challenger Financial LTD and AMA Group.
The purpose of this research report is to evaluate the financial performance and strength of companies using a relative valuation approach and formulate a view of their ability to generate returns to investors and ultimately provide a buy or sell recommendation to potential investors.
In reality a much more rigorous discounted cash flow valuation is needed to provide a more accurate assessment of companies share price, however, there is a positive correlation between stock price evaluation accuracy and traditional strategy and ratio analysis.
This is demonstrated by comparing the stock prices derived from very sophisticated valuation models belonging to professional analysts with the thorough assessment of a company’s future performance built from detailed ratio analysis.
When researching a company the aim is to make an evaluation on its performance and position and ultimately determine if the company stock is a buy, hold or sell.
The two companies that have been researched have been selected carefully because they of interest to the author and they display very different characteristics to each other. They are different in terms of their size, structure, strategic objectives and industry.
Financial analysis cannot be conducted on its own and needs to be considered in the context of what is known about the company and the sector in which it operates. The more we integrate financial analysis into the knowledge of the business and its strategic position then the more meaningful and insightful our research will be to the decision-making process.
All this information together should allow us to formulate a view on the future prospects of the company.
Strategic Position - Challenger LTD (ASX: CGF) – See note 1 Supplementary
Challenger is a diversified financial services business with a current market cap. of $7.32bn and has a unique strategic position as Australia’s leading retirement income specialist.
Retirees are increasingly seeking a stable, regular, reliable income stream to replace salaries and maintain lifestyles and Challenger will continue to benefit from the growth in Australia’s retirement income market and the move to more guaranteed retirement incomes.
Challenger Life which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Challenger Ltd provides a diverse range of annuity based retirement income products aimed at the retirement, superannuation and pension markets complimented by a strong brand. Annuity based investment products are closely linked to an insurance business because Challenger make regular payments to investors over a defined period or life once an initial upfront sum is invested.
The outlook for the Australian wealth management sector is positive. Challengers core business is in annuities which has significant tailwinds to grow with Australia’s compulsory superannuation regime and legislated increases of superannuation contributions growing to 12% of employee salaries by 2025 from 9.5% currently.
Challenger is dominant in the annuities market holding about 75% market share of annuities and in addition is available for sale across many investment platforms accessed by the majority of financial advisers and industry super funds in Australia.
Various estimates show superannuation funds are forecast to grow to between $ 6.1 trillion and $ 9.5 trillion by 2035. The opportunity for Challenger comes from capturing funds transitioning from the accumulation phase to the retirement phase. Currently, this equates to around AUD 58 billion per year but is expected to increase.
The periods selected for analysis are 3 financial years 2015, 2016 & 2017.
See Table 1for all ratio workings.
There has been a small increase in ROE from 11.76% in 2015 to 13.77% in 2017. These numbers are considered quite good and above average for the sector. They can be largely attributed to a 33% increase in operating profit after tax and a 14% increase in shareholders’ equity over the period. The main change to shareholders’ equity has come from 18% increase in retained earnings.
The ROA has increased slightly to be 1.73% in 2017 with a corresponding increase in total assets of 24% over the 3-year period. This means the company is earning a higher return on the assets under its control.
There is a consistent leverage ratio of 7 across all three years which is considered to be quite high indicating that the company funds the majority of its assets with debt and is therefore highly leveraged.
Whenever ROE is higher than ROA it means the company is making money for owners by borrowing. In this case over the period the ROA has increased 7% and leverage has increased 9% resulting in an overall increase in ROE.
If a company has commitments to issue further shares then the current level of shares will become diluted if exercised. This would result in the lowering of the return to current shareholders.
Challenger earnings per share chart
Challengers book value per share grew by $0.59 over the period from $4.46 to $5.05 and this is consistent with increased retained earnings improving shareholder’s equity. In 2017 the companies price to book ratio was $2.72 which can be interpreted as having a market capitalization 172% higher than its book value.
With 572m shares on issue the stock market valued challenger at $7.84b compared to its equity book value of $2.89b. This is a very significant premium and is a symptom of the vary high share price built on high expectations of future earnings. Challenger is being valued as an exciting high growth company which means there is significant downside risk if the company fails to deliver.
The price of Challenger has been taken as at 29/6 each year and has climbed 102% over that period effectively doubling in price climbing from $6.79 to $ 13.71. This increase in share price also coincides with an 80% increase in the normalized PE ratio to 20 times.
This is a robust PE indicating that the market sees Challenger as a growth stock with very good prospects. A company with a high pe ratio is expected to show greater future earnings potential than its current level making it a growth stock and with anticipations of further share price gains.
The payout ratio for Challenger is 50% on average which is the proportion of earnings paid to shareholders and the remaining 50% is retained in the company to either finance assets or reduce debt.
Ordinarily the payout ratio is aligned to the pe set by the market and fast growing companies like Challenger have limited surplus cashflow so pay small amounts of dividends and prefer to reinvest in the business.
The dividend yield which is the dividend expressed as a percentage of the current share price has been consistently held at 3.50% on average over the 3 years.
This is a reasonably high yield or income payment considering Challenger has all the attributes of a growth stock which would be quite attractive to investors.
The debt to equity ratio for Challenger on average is 6.50 and increasing slightly and because the ratio is greater than 1 it means the assets are mostly financed with debt which is consistent with the high leverage ratio. This can be a warning signal as significant debt carries the hazard of interest rate increases and must be substantiated with higher returns over and above the cost of borrowing.
As we would expect from previous analysis the debt to equity and leverage ratio the debt to assets ratio is also very high suggesting that 87% of Challengers assets are funded by debt.
Challengers cash flow to total assets increased more than half to 58% over the period which was attributable to the strong sales of life and annuity premiums of 20% in past two years.
The analysis presents Challenger as a company that has experienced high growth in the last few years showing significant increases in after tax profit, assets, shareholder equity and steady ROE.
The market expects the upward trend to continue and is pricing this in to the share price which is reflected in the aggressive price to book valuation. The company has a healthy cash flow with a 58% increase in cash flow to assets with strong annuity sales leveraged to the retirement income market in Australia.
Challenger Limited - Author Research Recommendation = BUY
Strategic Position - AMA Group Ltd (ASX: AMA) – See Note 2 Supplementary
AMA Group Limited derives its revenue from the operation and development of businesses in the wholesale vehicle aftercare and accessories market. The company primarily operates a chain of collision-repair centres and service workshops in Australia for brakes and transmissions. It also makes and distributes some automotive products such as 4WD parts and services.
The AMA motor vehicle panel-repair division makes up 85% of AMA’s revenue from operations incorporating eight collision-repair brands that cover 79 sites across Australia.
The national body repair market is worth $7bn and AMA has a significant market share by applying advanced technology and robotics completely transforming the traditional repair practices.
Its only relatively recently with the arrival of firms like AMA that there has been consolidation in the automotive repair and accessory industry which was primarily a cottage industry made up of small family owned and operated businesses.
AMA has a very unique strategic business model that the capital markets refer to as “a roll up business”. A roll up is effectively when a larger company has the intention of merging and acquiring smaller businesses to make a larger entity and typically this is executed within the same industry.
The roll up strategy that AMA are implementing is focused on targeting similar businesses in the crash repair and 4WD accessories industry and the outcome is an expanded geographic reach, scale advantage and consolidation of costs.
The attractiveness of the roll up strategy for AMA is the ability to grow very quickly and the valuation multiple arbitrage. By consolidating the earnings from smaller and similar firms the valuation of AMA will be larger than the sum of its parts. This is because the market places a higher valuation multiple on firms with larger and more diversified revenue streams due to the reduction in volatility and less risk.
See Table 3 for ratio workings
June 2017 financials are not yet available and I preferred not to use half yearly 2017 which means the periods selected for analysis are 3 financial years 2014, 2015 & 2016.
There has been a large decrease in ROE from 14.48%% in 2014 to 4.92% in 2016. These numbers are considered exceptionally poor for a company and we need to look into the numbers to understand why they have declined so much. Revenue from operations was up 183% due to increase receipts from customers but operating profit after tax declined by 20% from 2016 to 2016 after being up 51% in 2014 to 2015.
The change in profit can be largely attributed to a 253% increase in shareholders’ equity over the period. The main change to shareholders’ equity has come from 130% increase in contributed equity from 2015 to 2016. The capital raising in July together with the use of shares as vendor consideration has seen the contributed equity base rise from $74.904 million to $172.149 million.
The ROA like ROE has also decreased by a large amount (76%) over the period to be 2.83% in 2016 with a massive increase in total assets of 391% over the 3-year period.
This means the company is earning a lower return on the assets under its control. Looking at the accounts in more detail shows a very large increase in intangibles and the notes to the accounts show this as goodwill which has increased from 2015-2016 by 203%. This is perhaps not unusual given the company is on a very aggressive acquisition path and is continuing to raise equity for future growth strategies.
There is a consistent leverage ratio of 1-2 times across all three years which is considered to be low for a growth stock indicating that the company funds the majority of its assets with equity and is therefore conservatively leveraged.
Whenever ROE is higher than ROA it means the company is making money for owners by borrowing. In this case leverage has increased 39% resulting in an overall doubling in ROE.
AMA is a company on a very fast mergers and acquisitions growth path “a roll up” which means that it is continually issuing further shares and the current level of shares will become diluted. This would result in the lowering of the return to current shareholders.
This is consistent as normalize EPS has fallen 7% and diluted EPS has fallen 9% over the period.
AMA book value per share fell by 47% over the period from $0.55 to $0.29 and this is consistent with increased shares on issue up by 565% although shareholders’ equity increased by 253% but much of this is goodwill. In 2016, the companies price to book ratio was 2.86 which can be interpreted as having a market capitalization 186% higher than its book value.
With 498m shares on issue the stock market valued AMA at $418.49m compared to its equity book value of $144.48m. This is a very significant premium and is a symptom of the vary high share price built on high expectations of future earnings. AMA is being valued as an exciting high growth company which means there is significant downside risk if the company fails to deliver.
The price of AMA has been taken as at 29/6 each year and has returned 200% on initial share price in 3 years effectively tripling in price climbing from $0.28 to $ 0.84. This increase in share price also coincides with a 229% increase in the normalized PE ratio to 54.19 times.
This is a very aggressive and optimistic PE multiple indicating that the market sees AMA as super growth stock with very good earnings prospects. A company with a high pe ratio is expected to show greater future earnings potential than its current level making it a growth stock and with anticipations of further share price gains.
The payout ratio for AMA is 60% on average which is the proportion of earnings paid to shareholders and the remaining 40% is retained in the company to either finance assets or reduce debt.
Ordinarily the payout ratio is aligned to the pe set by the market and fast growing companies like AMA have limited surplus cashflow so pay small amounts of dividends and prefer to reinvest in the business. AMA through shareholder capital raising have retired debt and therefore have been able to reward investors with dividends taken from cash.
The dividend yield which is the dividend expressed as a percentage of the current share price has been consistently held at 2.70% on average over the 3 years.
This is a low high yield or income payment consistent with a growth stock which would be satisfactory to investors.
The debt to equity ratio for AMA on average is .50 and increasing slightly and because the ratio is less than 1 it means the assets are mostly financed with equity which is consistent with the low leverage ratio. This can be a prudent management strategy as significant debt carries the hazard of interest rate increases and must be considered against the potential to generate higher returns over and above the cost of borrowing through leverage.
As we would expect from previous analysis the debt to equity and leverage ratio the debt to assets ratio is also conservative suggesting that 42% of AMA assets are funded by debt.
AMA cash flow to total assets increased by 25% over the period which was attributable to the goodwill item from acquisition in past two years and an increase in receipts from customers of 159% from 2015 to 2016.
The analysis presents AMA as a company that has experienced high growth in the last few years demonstrating that they are continuing to look for significant mergers and acquisitions which should be accretive to increases in after tax profit, assets, shareholder equity and steady ROE.
The company reported a decline of 20% in after tax profit, however, the financial notes indicate that reported earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, amortisation and impairment expense (“EBITDA”) has increased from $14.194 million to $24.672 million; a 73.82% increase.
The market expects the upward trend to continue and is pricing this in to the share price which is reflected in the aggressive price to book valuation. This is a very highly priced stock and therefore considered expensive on all earnings valuation metrics and continues to raise equity which may be dilutive. The company has potential to increase gearing and improve returns to shareholders and could be a takeover target for its main customers the big insurance companies which could see the company sell at a premium to current share price.
Author Research Recommendation = BUY
Equity analysts collect and evaluate information about the companies they are analysing to recommendations about what the stock is currently worth and make a buy/sell stock recommendation to other investors.
Not only will the current stock price need to be evaluated but the future stock price will also need to be evaluated against possible earnings scenarios accounting for factors that may or may not impact the company and therefore the probability of various earnings outcomes. The underlying information and final recommendation is relied upon by investors and therefore very valuable.
Unfortunately, there are quite often large forecast errors related to equity analyst’s investment recommendations and a study by nerdwallet.com (2013) found that 49% of recommendations on the top 30 US stocks during that year were incorrect. The survey did show however, that analysts are better at identifying winners, with over 70% of buy ratings correct, buys made up about 85% of all accurate ratings. Hold ratings performed worst, with only 20% of them playing out as expected.
What are these underlying factors that analysts rely upon to explain an investment’s risk and return profile? The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) first developed from Markowitz portfolio theory is a mathematical model that shows us how to determine the discount rate of a stock. The discount rate or expected return on an investment requires an estimate of the risk-free rate, risk premium and Beta.
The idea behind Beta is it is a relationship between returns on a stock and returns on the market. Beta is therefore a function of a stocks sensitivity to market risk, which implies that an investment with a high Beta should earn higher returns. Beta is therefore an underlying factor and implies market exposure is a factor.
Analysts need to identify and evaluate several factors that will enable a company’s share price to earn a positive premium in the future and identify those factors that may cause a share price fall which is valuable to investors who wish to avoid a loss.
The CAPM is notably a single-factor model whereby an investment’s return over the long term is determined entirely by its exposure to Beta. Expanding on the CAPM, from the premise that the only factor to be considered is market risk. Ross (1976) proposed the arbitrage pricing theory (APT), which, in contrast to the CAPM, allows for multiple risk factors that may earn a return premium.
APT does not tell analysts which factors are relevant to particular stocks and large forecast errors can occur if the appropriate factors are either included or excluded from the analyst’s valuation thesis. For example, along with appropriate financial data the following risk factors may need to be assessed – environmental, government policy settings, change in industrial production, change in expected inflation, new technology, change in interest rates, currency movement and geo political risks.
It takes a great amount of knowledge, experience and skill to define and calculate the factor risk premiums that are such a critical ingredient in making accurate investment recommendations.
An appropriate way to begin an elementary discussion on the ethical behaviours of professional fund managers is to discuss the potential conflicts of interest that exist in the industry.
The fund managers are in a principal agent relationship which means that the investor who has the capital assigns the management of that capital to an agent in this case a fund manager to invest the capital on their behalf.
This arrangement which essentially separates an investor from the management of their money can lead to what is commonly referred to as the principal agent problem. This situation typically arises when the interests of either party are not aligned and the fund manager has the opportunity and possibly the motivation to act against the investors best interests.
Some criticism has been levelled at the industry and the question often asked is “are fund managers in the funds management business or the business funds management”.
The first obligation recognizes that investors interests should come first after all they are entrusting the management of their money to the fund manager and paying a fee for the privilege. Unfortunately, what is not always appreciated or understood by investors is that the fund manager may also have their own incentives in place to maximize revenue and profit from the fund management operating company itself.
It is not only the fund managers who are being encouraged to behave more ethically in the agent-principal relationship but senior executives and CEO’s have been asked to take leadership for an organizations culture and cement ethics as a key value priority to change the sales culture in many firms.
Ethics and regulation are fundamental to maintaining a healthy and sustainable funds management industry that can have such a profound effect on the lives of people through the wealth creation and sometimes destruction of people’s superannuation and retirement funds.
It is therefore critical to have in place an appropriate code of ethics, laws, regulation and compliance frameworks to ensure that in the highly complex business of investment management that money managers do the right thing regardless of the immediate financial reward.
Ethics and a code of conduct are quite often voluntary in the financial services industry which means that regulators supported by legislation must also impose a standard of ethical behaviours on market participants as part of their supervisory role.
If the managed funds industry is going to remain a viable and sustainable industry it must do a better job of demonstrating it is a true profession by promoting the highest standards of ethical behavior, compliance, education, and professional conduct.
A strong ethical culture is fundamental to building a strong industry culture that guides actions and decisions that a truly in the client’s best interest.
The analysis of financial statements suggests ratio analysis is a very effective tool to compare and contrast the financial performance of companies but without the investigation and knowledge of the company and the study of the industry it is in the conclusion as to a buy or sell recommendation can be incorrect
There are various ratios that we can use to analyse a company’s financial performance and position. There is a vast array of ratios that could be calculated but I have chosen a meaningful set of ratios that are compatible to both companies.
Ratio analysis is the main technique adopted and ratios are grouped together in specific categories relevant to the company being researched. The value of the analysis depends on the quality of the financial data and the judgement of the ratios which we wish to use as indicators to the future prospects of the company. Different ratios have the advantage of offering analysis of various components of a company.
Types of information sourced includes last two years’ annual reports which provides detailed and comprehensive information pertaining to the income statement and balance sheet. The annual reports also offer valuable insight and commentary from the management teams including information on new ventures and growth strategies for the company.
Company websites are useful for the starting point of the analysis and features many news items and announcement updates. Research reports from stockbrokers and investment banks are also an excellent source of comparative information and recommendations on companies.
Ratios area quick method of extracting the information in the financial statements down into an easy to understand form that allows for comparability with other companies and sectors and the financial performance of the company of different periods.
Return on Equity
Often referred to as return on shareholders’ funds and is calculated as operating profit after tax divided by shareholder’s equity.
Return on Assets
Determines the return on assets under a company’s control and is calculated by operating profit after tax divided by total assets.
Leverage
The link between ROE & ROA is leverage which is defined as total assets divided by shareholder’s equity. This measure is the proportion of equity funding across total assets and the higher the ratio the smaller the equity component of assets which means a greater proportion of debt is used to fund assets.
Earnings per share
Operating profit after tax divided by number of ordinary shares on issue.
Book value per share
This is shareholder’s common equity divided by shares on issue and is expressed as the value of shareholder equity to shares on issue.
Price to earnings ratio
This is the current market share divided by earnings per share and defines the relationship between earnings and price of the stock in the market. All things being equal the market price of a stock should reflect investors’ expectations of future performance and therefore the PE ratio compares present performance with those expectations.
Dividend payout ratio
Annual dividends are divided by EPS.
Debt to equity ratio
Calculated as total liabilities divided by total shareholders’ equity and measures the proportion of borrowing to owners’ equity.
Debt to assets ratio
Divides total liabilities by total assets and is correlated to the debt to equity ratio and shows the proportion of assets funded by borrowings.
Challenger currently manages $10bn in policyholder liabilities, which require payment of fixed and guaranteed rates of return. These payments are in effect guaranteed by Challenger which means any changes to the ability of underlying cash flows from current investments to meet future payment obligations makes Challenger a riskier business when compared to a traditional funds management business or a bank.
Another division of the business that is consistently growing and generating revenues is the funds management business called “Fidante Partners”. This business has $47billion in funds under management and takes equity positions in boutique asset managers which compliments the annuity business by providing an alternative series of asset classes for investors.
According the association of superannuation funds of Australia Superannuation assets in aggregate were $2,259 billion ($2.3 trillion rounded) at the end of the March 2017 quarter, up from the previous quarter which were $2,199 billion, and are now at an all-time historical record level. Over the 12 months to March 2017, there was a 11.2 per cent increase in total superannuation assets.
Challenger is uniquely set up to deliver products and services to meet the industry retirement income challenge. With a rapidly ageing population the Australian government is tackling the retirement issues identified in the Murray inquiry (Financial Systems Inquiry) that was finalized in December 2014.
One of the recommendations from this inquiry was a need to develop 'Comprehensive Income Products for Retirement', or CIPRs. Challenger is likely to benefit from its expertise in building products that fit the CIPR specifications and make it easier for people to transition into retirement.
Unfortunately, the government is constantly tinkering and amending the rules surrounding superannuation and tax which impacts those currently in the super and pension environment and also those people contemplating further allocations. This means that as much as the current superannuation and retirement legislative framework is working in Challengers favour it also poses a future risk to the business from any future unfavorable government policy changes in this area.
As a result of technology in motor vehicles, accidents are less frequent and, are less serious with vehicles able to be driven away.
The crash repair industry is being forced change and adapt in response to technology that is both preventing accidents and totally changing the way the cars are repaired. Motor vehicles with minor damage can know be repaired and painted within a matter of hours instead of days and weeks.
AMA is an innovator in the industry and has developed small to medium accident repair technology and is selling the product to the major car insurers in Australia. There are two insurers in the Australian market that contract out 85 per cent of smash repairs and the consolidation that has taken place amongst insurers is the driving force behind forcing the smash repair industry to innovate and consolidate. Interestingly these insurers have taken
AMA has the ability to acquire more panel beaters and drive efficiencies through “roll up and continue to grow its earnings and shareholder value through valuation multiple arbitrage.
There is also the distinct possibility that the major insurers will chose to own the smash repair industry and roll it up into their own vertically integrated model. This makes AMA attractive from the perspective as a potential takeover target.
The sales and product distribution of mutual funds has also attracted the attention of regulators because of commission based incentives and misalignment of how the brokers and financial advisers get paid understanding that it’s the investors that pay the fees. This has attracted the attention of ASIC who are imposing a number of regulatory guides to encourage better fee disclosure.
The CFA (Chartered Financial Analysts) is a worldwide member based organization representing the funds management industry and has developed a rigorous code of ethics. These codes are designed to guide fund managers to act in the best interest of customers when structuring compensation payments, collecting fees and disclosing a potential conflict of interest.
In Australia ASIC (Australian Securities & Investment Commission) is responsible for supervising and regulating fund managers. ASIC has the power to enforce the law surrounding the funds management industry and also prosecute those that break the law. In addition, ASIC will also recommend and enforce changes to avoid unnecessary complexity and encourage transparent disclosures from fund managers in order better inform customers to make appropriate choices and ensure that those managing their money act in their best interests.
The issues identified above become magnified when we consider that trillions of dollars are currently advised by fund managers around the globe and the fees generated on this capital can be extraordinarily lucrative for individuals working in funds management businesses and the firms themselves.
Some examples of where I think Ethics and regulation are needed and could play a greater role in the industry are in the areas of incentive schemes and marketing services.
For example, investors have become totally disenfranchised with mutual funds because many still have compensation structures in place that allow the deduction of a performance fee by the manager even though the client may have lost capital. The justification for this quite often is because the fund manager may have produced a return that exceeded a benchmark that was more negative than the negative return received by the investor.
The above statement questions the mismatch in incentives and motivations of professional fund managers who quite often assume two roles when it comes to managing people’s money. This creates a tension between the profession of managing money and the business and an issue that the industry, practitioners and investors are currently debating.
Valuation of a company’s stock price is part art and part science because it relies on both quantitative inputs such as financial statement information as well as qualitative judgements such as technological impacts on a firm and both inputs are critical to analyse and make an estimation of a company’s stock price.
Multifactor models like APT allow for different sensitivities to different factors but the model does not prescribe which factors should apply to particular companies.
This is the role of the analyst and large forecasting errors can occur if care is not taken to allow for stocks to have different sensitivities to different types of market-wide risk premium factors (e.g., inflation, business cycles, interest rates etc.)
A study of analyst forecast reliability in Australia, 2013, Alina Maydybura, Dionigi Gerace, Brian Andrew from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1511&context=buspapers
Alan Kohler, Australia’s four great panel beating families, 21 May 2015 from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/business-spectator/australias-four-great-panel-beating-families/news-story/c7132a5f23452661ee58e7d3e860f873
Anthony Asher, Do ethics and investment management fit together? 27 Aug 2015 from https://cuffelinks.com.au/ethics-investment-management-fit-together/
Arbitrage Pricing Theory and Multifactor Models of Risk and Return from http://mirceatrandafir.com/teaching/econ435/Chapter_11.pdf
ASFA Super statistics, 2016 from https://www.superannuation.asn.au/resources/superannuation-statistics
Asset manager code of professional conduct, 2nd edition, CFA Institute from http://www.cfapubs.org/doi/pdf/10.2469/ccb.v2009.n8.1
ASX announcements from http://amagroupltd.com
Australian Superannuation Industry, Ross Clare & Andrew Craston, March 2017
Challenger Annual Report 2016
Challenger Annual Report 2017
Challenger charts from https://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/financials?s=CGF:ASX
Challenger Ltd, Investor day, 2 June 2016 from http://www.challenger.com.au/Investor_Day_presentation_(ASX_version).pdf
Chester S. Spatt, Conflicts of Interest in Asset management, 12 May 2015, https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/spch051205css.htm
Department of Treasury, Australian Government, Development of the framework for Comprehensive income products for retirement, 15 Dec 2016 from https://consult.treasury.gov.au/retirement-income-policy-division/comprehensive-income-products-for-retirement/
Factor Based Investing, Scott N. Pappas, CFA; Joel M. Dickson, Ph.D. April 2015 from https://advisors.vanguard.com/VGApp/iip/site/advisor/researchcommentary/article/IWE_ResFactorBasedInvesting
Financial Accounting, Integrated Approach, K Trotman, E Carson, M Gibbins, 2016
IBIS World, AMA group LTD – Profile Company report Australia, 30 June 2016 from https://www.ibisworld.com.au/australian-company-research-reports/manufacturing/ama-group-limited-company.html
Investment Analysis & Portfolio Management, Reilly & Brown, 2012
KPMG, Major Australian Banks: Full year 2016 results Snapshot from https://home.kpmg.com/au/en/home/insights/2016/11/major-australian-banks-full-year-2016-snapshot.html
Mark Beyer, Business news Western Australia, 14 September 2015 from https://www.businessnews.com.au/article/From-zero-to-100m-in-six-years
Market release, 2017 half year Results from http://www.challenger.com.au/group/1H17_Market_Release.pdf
Meeting the retirement income challenge, Taylee Lewis, 8 may 2017 from https://investmentmagazine.com.au/2017/05/meeting-the-retirement-income-challenge/
Morningstar Equity Research, 14 July 2017: Challenger LTD
Paul Smith, CFA Societies Australia, where do we want to be as an industry? 13th October 2015 from http://www.cfa-australia.com.au/library/how-we-can-improve-the-industry/
Scancorp Capital P/L, The Anatomy of a Business Roll-up, Version 1.0 from http://www.scancorp.com.au/_dbase_upl/Anatomy_of_a_Business_Rollup_Scancorp_Overview.pdf
Simon Evans, 11 May 2017, Crash repairer AMA Group turns bingles into gold from http://www.afr.com/business/retail/crash-repairer-ama-group-turns-bingles-into-gold-20170510-gw272i
Study: 49% of Analyst Ratings on the Dow 30 Were Incorrect in 2012, April 2016 from https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/investing/investing-data/investment-stock-analyst-ratings-stockpicking-research-wrong/
Sunit N. Shah, 2014, The Principal-Agent problem in Finance from https://www.cfainstitute.org/learning/foundation/research/Documents/principal-agent_problem_in_finance.pdf
Tadas Viskanta, The principal agent problem in funds management, 7 January 2017 from https://abnormalreturns.com/2013/01/07/the-principal-agent-problem-in-fund-management/
The Earnings Forecast Accuracy, Valuation Model Use, and Price Target Performance of Sell-Side Equity Analysts, Cristi A. Gleason, W. Bruce Johnson, and Haidan Li Tippie, College of Business, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, Preliminary Draft: May, 2006 from http://care-mendoza.nd.edu/assets/152422/gleason_6_06.pdf
UBS Challenger Ltd Snapshot, 15 august 2017: FY17 Results
Usman Hayat, CFA Institute, Ethics in investment management: How to get it right, May 2013 from https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2013/05/20/ethics-in-investment-management-how-to-get-it-right/
Vanguard Australian Superannuation System Overview, Paul Murphy, June 2017
Why AMA Group is Powering, T Featherstone, 18 Aug 2017 from http://www.thebull.com.au/premium/a/68718-why-ama-group-is-powering.html
留言