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 Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StanX Long who wrote (62391)	3/27/2002 10:38:25 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 70976

re: why so much difference in PE: The P can be: 1. realtime 2. yesterday's close 3. whenever they last updated their report (last week?, last year?) The E can be: 1. trailing 2. forward 3. combo (last 6 months + forward 6 months) 4. GAAP 5. pro forma (as defined by each company for themselves only) 6-38. some indeterminate midway point between GAAP and pro forma. 39. I've also seen the last completed fiscal year used (which can be an E almost a full year out of date). Unfortunately, the sites where PE data is available, rarely state exactly how they calculate PE. You have to infer it. Comparing PEs is apples-to-oranges, unless you always use the same source (and assuming they don't change their methods over time). The only standardized method of calculating E is the GAAP method. So, a PE using GAAP E, is the only PE useful for comparing companies to each other, especially companies in different industries. My favorite PE for AMAT is from Standard and Poor's, who says their PE is "NM". I think that stands for "not mentionable" (in polite company). Or "nothing material". Don't ask me why, I don't know. If I care, I use SEC filings, and calculate it myself.