Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: milo_morai who wrote (126372)	10/18/2000 11:34:57 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583902

Intersting Analysis - It only looks at 100 stocks and only for one quarter but it seems to indicate that stocks with better earnings and growth perfrom poorly??? (I guess that would explain AMD's recent decline) :-( moneycentral.msn.com The 50 best, the 50 worst To understand what happened in the summer quarter, I broke the S&P 500 Index ($INX) components into two extremes: The 50 most- and 50 least-successful stocks. The contrasts between them contradict most of what growth investors hold dear: The 50 best stocks sported slower growth rates than the 50 worst. Winners on average recorded trailing 12-month annual earnings growth of 17%, while losers were growing at a 26% clip. The 50 best were also expected by analysts to grow more slowly in the future than the 50 worst, by 16% to 19%. The 50 best stocks were less profitable than the 50 worst stocks, especially in contrast to their industry. The 50 best had a ratio of return on equity vs. their industry of 1.17, while the worst had a ratio of 1.50. The only predictable contrast between the two camps came in their capacity to beat analysts’ consensus earnings estimates. Winners surprised on the upside by 12% on average, while losers on average surprised on the downside by -2.1%.