CLMT reported 2Q adjusted net income per unit of ($0.25), missing consensus’ ($0.10) but slightly ahead of our ($0.28) estimate. Some operating cost items (transportation expense and taxes other than income) came in below our model. Specialty margins of almost $45/bbl were ahead of our expectations, though sales volumes were below our model. Fuels volumes were in line, but margins were worse.
Search Coverage List, Models & Reports
Search Results1-10 out of 29984
One key tenet of our investment thesis has been that VIAC would be given a multiple on its streaming business as the strategy became clearer and execution was visible – while details on incremental expansion costs are unclear, we think All Access and to some extent Pluto will be the key drivers to take the stock higher. We reiterate OP.
Considering XRAY has no PPE benefit (we est 230bps for HSIC/100bps for NVST), a ~flat July compares to an ex-PPE LSD for HSIC and slightly negative for NVST (Exhibit 10). XRAY’s June organic growth of -40% was worse than peers, est down 20-30% for NVST and est -20% for HSIC, indicating the upward trend through June and into July was particularly strong for XRAY, likely in part driven by normalizing inventory levels in the channel. In 2Q XRAY’s organic growth of -49.9% was below HSIC’s -39.5% organic WW dental (-41.8% ex. PPE) and modestly below NVST at -46% in 2Q (-47% ex. infection control). Longer-term we expect XRAY to outperform expectations on product cycle benefits and margin improvement; we reiterate our OP rating and maintain our PT of $61.
HFC reported 2Q adjusted EPS of ($0.25), beating consensus of ($0.55) and our ($0.54) estimate. The beat was primarily driven by Lubricants as the segment delivered a $32MM positive variance vs our model. Lower SG&A and a higher tax benefit also contributed to the beat. Refinery throughput came in above our expectation and gross margins were in line, though opex was higher than we thought.
As our regular readers are well aware, we believe that U.S. equity markets (and particularly the NASDAQ-100) are in the midst of a Fed-induced bubble. We’ve received pushbacks against our call on several fronts. With respects to fundamentals, many investors point to the fact that companies have absolutely trounced analysts’ estimates during 2Q20 earnings season. There’s no denying this fact. With 401 S&P 500 companies now reported, 60% of companies have beaten on the top-line by more than +1% in aggregate, while 83% have surpassed consensus EPS by a whopping +23%.
We believe that there is less downside risk to Enable following a better than expected Q2 earnings and 2020 outlook, plus a growing likelihood in our view that ENBL’s general partners – CNP and OGE – may express an openness for strategic alternatives including a sale. Given the flux in the Mid-Con there is still potential that ENBL will remain tied to the price of crude, but at a near sector low EBITDA multiple coupled with a 12.5% yield we think the risk reward tilts in favor of holding ENBL at these levels.
Norwegian’s 2Q report reflected industry-wide disruptions. Demand for 2021 sailings remains within historical ranges – similar to last quarter – but the company’s updated cash burn estimate is at the high end of its prior target due to additional debt and higher costs (now $160mm per month vs. $120mm-$160mm previously). Expectations across the category remain low, and we continue to view the return of U.S. sailings as the key operational milestone for the industry (expected at the end of October).
BMY reported Q2 results ahead of the market open on Thursday, beating on revenues and EPS, and lifting 2020 guidance (modestly). During its earnings conference call, there were some important new disclosures that speak to critical parts of the BMY story. First, on Eliquis, we asked whether generics might get delayed beyond the mid-2027 timeframe that we and consensus broadly assume, and the company suggested this is a possibility (the genesis of the question was curious language in the press release from Wednesday night, mentioning a formulation patent that extends to 2031 – a delay could be meaningful to sentiment as future LOEs is the central bear case against BMY and Eliquis is one of the major brands slated for LOE between now and the end of the decade). Second, BMY also announced it now has in-hand positive ph2 results from TYK2 in the new indication of psoriatic arthritis – the upside with TYK2 is that it is a “platform drug” beyond just psoriasis (where ph3 results are pending – due before year-end) – BMY will now be advancing to ph3 in psoriatic arthritis, and other POC trials in other indications remain underway. There were other small updates given as well that were encouraging – such as its confidence in the strength of the data relative to competitors for both Checkmate-9ER (Opdivo in renal) and ozanimod in ulcerative colitis – both data sets have only been top-lined, with presentation of full results coming in 2H most likely.
BMY has been the most controversial of the Outperform ratings we have. It has been a volatile stock over the years tied to mishaps in the immuno-oncology space and there is continued uncertainty over the long-term trajectory of Opdivo, but the product will continue to remain one of the market-leading PD1 therapies over the long-term and its importance to the story is much less than it used to be. The success of CM-227 Part 1A and CM-9LA resulted in two approvals in 1L lung (finally!) offering some differentiation from MRK’s Keytruda+chemo combo, in that BMY offers a “chemo-lite” and “chemo-free” regimens, but the incremental revenue potential from this is likely only modest. The main reason to own BMY is for its broader pipeline of late-stage assets, with plenty of data read-outs and new product approvals coming over the next 12-18mo. Our belief is that, assuming there are no major setbacks, BMY’s P/E multiple has room to expand enough to generate a decent investor return, while still leaving the stock at a discount to peers (warranted because of its heavy future LOE burden). As we have shown in recent analyses, it is very uncommon for big pharma stocks to have single digit P/E multiples, when doing a look-back over the last 20y – this history suggests some degree of mean reversion lay ahead (meaning P/E multiple expansion) which could deliver a good return to shareholders.
FOUR reported impressive results in its first earnings as a public company this morning, highlighted by net revenue and adj. EBITDA coming in well-ahead of Street estimates. Net revenues of $67.4mm (down 10% Y/Y) beat our and the Street’s $41mm. Adj EBITDA of $14.8mm (down 45%) beat our $6.5mm and the Street’s $6.2mm, reflecting adj. EBITDA margins of 18.7%, vs. the 16.0% in our prior model. End-to-end volume of $4.24bn (down 23% Y/Y) came in ahead of our $3.30bn. Gross profit of $32.3mm (down 26% Y/Y) came in ahead of our $20.5mm. Overall, we are encouraged by the print and believe trends underscore Shift4’s omnichannel differentiation which has become increasingly important to restaurant and hospitality clients in the current environment. It’s worth noting that the company’s end-to-end volume grew in June and July (and is included in guidance for 3Q and 4Q to grow), which is impressive given its end markets and underscores FOUR’s likely share gains, tech differentiation, and gateway conversion. For reference, the Company noted CNP trx comprised ~40% of total volume in April, compared to ~5% pre-COVID-19. Coupled with significant customer wins, conversions from gateway-only service, and attrition rates which we estimate are ~30-40% better than the industry average, we believe FOUR will continue to demonstrate relative resilience despite challenging vertical headwinds. On the call we will be looking for color on 1) revenue detail between gateway-only, end-to-end, and SaaS offerings, 2) recent metrics on CNP trx volumes, and 3) potential operating leverage from recovering trends. We would expect shares to outperform over the coming weeks following these results.
- 1 of 2999
- next →