galumay
learner
- Joined
- 17 September 2011
- Posts
- 3,414
- Reactions
- 2,251
I give up, continue your "religious" vandalism at will!
How to perform Beneish M Model
- Thread starter RandomInvestor
- Start date
-
- Tags
- beneish model
- Joined
- 4 October 2016
- Posts
- 253
- Reactions
- 5
I am not interested in technical analysis so far it seems you are referring to that?
- Joined
- 28 March 2006
- Posts
- 3,565
- Reactions
- 1,304
I was referring to it as another and perhaps a simpler option if you were intending to profit from A2M.
Disregard any reference then of course if it just a numbers study exercise.
Let us know though how 'the model' works out and if it indicates that they are 'manipulating' the figures
Last edited:
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,440
- Reactions
- 6,442
So explain to the duck
You calculate 8 ratios from the financial statement supplied by the company
You then combine the 8 ratios to get a score which if less that -2.2 suggests figures are not manipulated.
Two things
If you can't trust the figures how can you trust them in theses calculations
If the score is above -2.2 do you leave this alone period!
You calculate 8 ratios from the financial statement supplied by the company
You then combine the 8 ratios to get a score which if less that -2.2 suggests figures are not manipulated.
Two things
If you can't trust the figures how can you trust them in theses calculations
If the score is above -2.2 do you leave this alone period!
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
Beneish and Altzman scores does seem to measure what they say it would, but only for industrial companies. Or business similar in nature. So finance, insurance, banks or even a good [or bad] retailer might not be flagged by these.
So for ABC Learning...
Lower pane show probability of manipulation at 21%. You'd want that to be at the near zeros. [btw, I came up with that measure, so it's trademarked by yours truly
]But the final M score is just an overview, investors ought to look further into the factors that made up that final score.
Beneish himself broke the various underlying factors into two groups,
1. Distortions that can result from earnings manipulation: DSR, AQI, DEPI and TATA (Accruals);
2. Predisposition to engage in earnings manipulation: GMI, SGI, SGAI, LEVI.
As shown in the lower pane, Sales Growth Index [red line] jumps in 2004 to 2005, but.. .sales increases but margin decline.
Margin is shown by the Gross Margin Index [blue line]. It's rising but based on Beneish definition, a rising BMI mean declining profit margin from previous year [and is where Beneish's ratio doesn't make graphical/chart sense... anyway]
So it does give indication of a company's "predisposition" to manipulate earning. But there are a whole bunch of other factors to look into, apply it to the business in question to get a proper interpretation.
Like Altzman's Z score on financial distress...
All these measures doesn't mean the share price won't go up and keep going up. It doesn't mean the company's own fortune ahead won't change for the better.
And judging by the behaviours of the fundies, the pros, the value and the smart money guys... they'd probably make more money doing TA and ride the wave. That's what most of them did anyway, just a whole lot dumber.
- Joined
- 28 March 2006
- Posts
- 3,565
- Reactions
- 1,304
That bit reminds me of a tongue in cheek comment in an article that I read (and can't find now) where they asked the question of how do you recognise a fundy surfer.
He is the one who jumps on his board after the wave has passed
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
That bit reminds me of a tongue in cheek comment in an article that I read (and can't find now) where they asked the question of how do you recognise a fundy surfer.
He is the one who jumps on his board after the wave has passed
And I was one of the idiots who jumped on right after the fundies did on that one
Ah man, worked so hard to almost doubled my puny capital the previous two years. Needed to get out to get a real job so thought to park it somewhere safe. What's safer than a childcare business highly recommended by the smart monies. Little did I know that they too don't know.
- Joined
- 4 October 2016
- Posts
- 253
- Reactions
- 5
Ah ok.I was referring to it as another and perhaps a simpler option if you were intending to profit from A2M.
Disregard any reference then of course if it just a numbers study exercise.
Let us know though how 'the model' works out and if it indicates that they are 'manipulating' the figures
- Joined
- 4 October 2016
- Posts
- 253
- Reactions
- 5
Duck you have a good point. I don't know what to say anymore lol.
- Joined
- 28 March 2006
- Posts
- 3,565
- Reactions
- 1,304
RandomInvestor, I think the duck will agree that you don't have to say anything, you've got it.
While some see it as us having a go, really we are just highlighting a significant potential flaw which you now see.
Cheers
tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,440
- Reactions
- 6,442
With out being a smart arse
Just pop over to Charts of interest and have a look at WTC
Just pop over to Charts of interest and have a look at WTC
- Joined
- 4 October 2016
- Posts
- 253
- Reactions
- 5
Feels like you guys are trying to suck me into the art of technical analysis haha. But I am still confused what ur on about. This part here confuses me "we are just highlighting a significant potential flaw which you now see." I'll look back to what you previously wrote.RandomInvestor, I think the duck will agree that you don't have to say anything, you've got it.
While some see it as us having a go, really we are just highlighting a significant potential flaw which you now see.
Cheers
- Joined
- 4 October 2016
- Posts
- 253
- Reactions
- 5
I looked at those 2 links and I don't know what I am looking at. But I read again what you said on the first page, about profiting from A2Milk I think you are thinking shorting it?
- Joined
- 28 March 2006
- Posts
- 3,565
- Reactions
- 1,304
The flaw I refer to is what tech/a highlighted in post #24, ie, in your original post you are attempting to find data to input in the formulae "to check if the company is manipulating their earnings".
If they are manipulating their earnings wouldn't that also imply that all of the data items you are attempting to input would likely be manipulated too ?
How do you know what are accurate or what is also "manipulated".
- Joined
- 28 March 2006
- Posts
- 3,565
- Reactions
- 1,304
We wouldn't do that, you can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink is the old saying
- Joined
- 4 October 2016
- Posts
- 253
- Reactions
- 5
Ah yeah! Thats what I was thinking about when duck wrote that, but didnt write it because something didn't make sense. But yeah you're right lol. But with what you just said I am trying to say something but don't know to say it like I think its this, that you get those numbers at face value and through the the beneish model see if there is manipulation. But this is same as what I said before.
I don't know what is accurate or what is manipulated that's what I am trying to find out and having no luck. My learning of value investing seems at its end lol.
Triathlete
Keep it Simple..!
- Joined
- 10 November 2014
- Posts
- 638
- Reactions
- 88
This is what I find hard about trying to analyse reports.
I started out using FA for many years but in my situation I found it takes too much time and so took the plunge into learning about T/A. I do not use indicators mainly EW, Cycles and Fibonacci levels.
I now find it so much easier to make decisions based on what I am seeing on a chart.
I still use FA but I use a paid service for this now "Lincoln Stock doctor" then use the charts to see if what they are saying and what is showing on the chart are agreeing.
The thing with TA for me now is even if I never use FA or read another report I would still be able to make money just from looking at Monthly and weekly charts and making decisions with what I am seeing on a chart.
Below is an extract from Market Wizards:
Happy Investing and Trading...
- Joined
- 28 March 2006
- Posts
- 3,565
- Reactions
- 1,304
I wouldn't give up on it, just don't adopt a religious attitude towards it or assume it is totally reliable.
There are numerous threads on here where it was obvious to blind freddy that something was amiss but yet some were ignoring reality.
I could probably put together a list where you could look at the ASX news, the post from individuals on here and on other sites and then look at what is actually happening with stock $$ wise.
One recent example was VOC, go back to about Sept last year in the posts and read on from there while glancing at the weekly chart positions as you go and you will see the obvious (to some).
I really do believe that FA and TA work well together as Triathlete describes but the chart is definitely the BS detector.
This is post #143 from there (didn't realise I had a list of failed stocks
) and the most accurate post on there is #144.Just my
again, CheersPost #143 from page 8 of the VOC thread in Oct '16.
- Joined
- 25 July 2010
- Posts
- 1,120
- Reactions
- 284
I wouldn't give up on it, just don't adopt a religious attitude towards it or assume it is totally reliable.
There are numerous threads on here where it was obvious to blind freddy that something was amiss but yet some were ignoring reality.
I could probably put together a list where you could look at the ASX news, the post from individuals on here and on other sites and then look at what is actually happening with stock $$ wise.
One recent example was VOC, go back to about Sept last year in the posts and read on from there while glancing at the weekly chart positions as you go and you will see the obvious (to some).
I really do believe that FA and TA work well together as Triathlete describes but the chart is definitely the BS detector.
This is post #143 from there (didn't realise I had a list of failed stocks
Just my
Post #143 from page 8 of the VOC thread in Oct '16.
You do realise you've quoted the person who very likely has the best record on this forum (there may be a few I'm not aware of that have better performance in terms of CAGR). People would bend over backward to replicate his success and his methods, and you've cherry-picked one post to suit your views.
Please tell me, what is the performance of your portfolio like? (CAGR since inception will do)
As an aside - I have to say I got this wrong (VOC). I did factor in some risk with the acquisition, but I didn't think it would be to this scale. That said, historically I've been right approximately 70% of the time (from memory - I did a review of this not long ago) and it gives some fairly good returns (20%+ per annum). I have to take the wrong with the right, because that's what this particular framework demands. If I choose at a later point to try my hand at technical analysis, then I'll make my decisions purely on this.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
naughty boggo. Can't call the lord's name in vain like that.