Raffles
Medical Group Ltd. SGX: R01
Fundamental analysis
1. Understanding the business
Raffles medical is a private group (non-governmental)
offering a wide range of healthcare-related products and services. While
extremely diversified, it is also simple, straightforward, clean and
understandable. It has medical clinics that deal with common ailments,
hospitals that have specialists to treat perhaps more severe cases and the
group also extends to dental and Chinese medicine.
2. Does the company have any barrier of entry,
which makes it very difficult for competitors to penetrate the company’s market
share?
Brand name – almost everyone in Singapore
knows of raffles medical and it also has built a reputation for itself throughout the years. As for customer loyalty, most people do not tend to hop from clinics to
clinics (or hospitals) each time they fall sick. Usually healthcare centers
tend to keep a past record of client’s condition so it is also easier for a
patient to return for future consultations.
Likewise in many other countries,
one of the main ‘competitor’ of sorts that has an impact on the profits of a
private medical group is the government’s healthcare. They are heavily
subsidized and most people will prefer going to government healthcare places. Recently the government also introduced several benefits such as the pioneer generation card and the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) card. These further adds to bring patients away from seeking private healthcare.
In Singapore, its current competitor is Parkway
Pantai, which operates a host of hospitals here, including mount Elizabeth and Gleneagles,
both fairly well known. However, they do not have much diversification in the
other healthcare sectors.
For this section, I feel that raffles medical do not
have any strong resistance in maintaining or expanding their group as the
various healthcare groups in Singapore all have their own specialty and their
group of customers.
3. Does this business operate in a
non-exciting industry?
I am not an expert myself so I wouldn’t say that the
medical sector is exciting or not. However I do know that common ailments such
as cold and flu have been around for a long time, and there isn’t any
breakthrough technology in treating them yet. In the more advanced sector,
there might be new technologies invented or discovered time to time but I feel
that the majority of the revenue from healthcare groups should come from what
they are usually doing.
4. Was the company successful in a
couple of locations before expanding nationally?
Quoted from the group’s website:
‘Founded in 1976 with two clinics in central
Singapore, RMG has grown consistently over the years. Today, RMG serves over two million patients
annually and more than 6,500 corporate clients including local and
multinational corporations and government agencies’
They have also managed to expand overseas and have
hospitals in Hong kong. From their history, we can see that their growth is
very good, even incorporating various aspects of healthcare such as dental,
TCM, healthcare insurance and even educational healthcare institutes.
5. Has the company dominated in a
particular segment of the market?
As discussed above, the company did
not dominate in a particular segment of the market. Its wide spectrum of
services all has their own, albeit minor, competitors.
6. Is this company operating in a
hot industry?
Nope, unless some kind of plague or
pandemic hits the world again.
Financials
7. What is the company’s earnings
growth over the previous 10 years? Does it grow constantly?
Year
|
EPS (cents)
|
05
|
2.96
|
06
|
3.78
|
07
|
7.23
|
08
|
6.02
|
09
|
7.22
|
10
|
8.51
|
11
|
9.36
|
12
|
10.42
|
13
|
11.58
|
14
|
11.96
|
15
|
TBA
|
That gives us an earnings growth of 24.57% for 10
years. It is also good to take note of the 2008’s financial crisis that only
caused a slight drop in EPS, which they then recovered from. It also has a smooth upwards trend which is
very feasible. The company scores very well in this section.
8. Retained earnings
Retained earnings of Raffles medical group for the past 10 years = 70.94 cents = $0.7094
Change in market price of the stock from 2005 to
2014 (dec) = 3.90 – 0.50 = $3.40
3.40/0.7094 = 4.792
Each dollar retained by raffles medical would
potentially* generate $4.792. This number is excellent.
*The word potentially is used as retained earnings
had not hit $1.
9. Owner income
Owner earnings = net income +
depreciation and amortization – capital expenditure
Year
|
Net income /profit after tax ($’000)
|
Depreciation and
amortization($’000)
|
Capital expenditure($’000)
|
Owner earnings($’000)
|
2005
|
12,038
|
3,053
|
5,757
|
9,334
|
2006
|
15,767
|
3,374
|
2,300
|
16,841
|
2007
|
35,924
|
4,220
|
4,286
|
35,858
|
2008
|
31,660
|
6,618
|
6,145
|
32,133
|
2009
|
38,033
|
6,891
|
3,892
|
41,032
|
2010
|
45,482
|
6,935
|
5,452
|
46,965
|
2011
|
50,621
|
7,240
|
114,543*
|
-56,682
|
2012
|
57,209
|
7,903
|
10,937
|
54,175
|
2013
|
85,295
|
8,268
|
9,108
|
84,455
|
2014
|
81,281
|
9,646
|
209,152*
|
-118,225
|
*In 2011, spike in capital expenditure can be accounted
to the purchase/extension of units within raffles hospital, thong sia building
and Samsung hub.
In 2014, the spike can be accounted to the purchase/extension
of units within raffles hospital extension and Holland village. (Details can be
found under financial report – investment properties)
From the data shown, owner income is rising steadily
for the past 10 years, excluding the investment of properties. Net income is
also rising steadily which is a good sign. In the financial crisis of 2008,
there also isn’t much drop of owner earnings which is a good trait we should be
looking out for.
10. Company’s current ratio
Current assets / current liabilities
for year 2013:
573,435/99,642 = 5.754
Current assets / current liabilities
for year 2014:
655,027/114,755 = 5.708
The company is in extremely good
standing in terms of ratio. They will have no problems paying off existing
debts. Even excluding receivables into calculation, the company’s current ratio
is well above 1. This result is excellent.
11. Return on equity
Raffles Medical Group Ltd (SGX:R01)
Return on Equity
11.26% (As of Jun. 2015)
Dec05
|
Dec06
|
Dec07
|
Dec08
|
Dec09
|
Dec10
|
Dec11
|
Dec12
|
Dec13
|
Dec14
|
11.52
|
14.26
|
22.87
|
14.93
|
16.06
|
16.88
|
16.25
|
15.74
|
19.72
|
13.38
|
Every year’s ROE is very good, although
it does show signs of a downward trend.
12. Gross profit margin, does it
grow or at least maintain?
Gross profit margin is defined as net
profit/revenue expressed in %.
Year
|
Gross profit margin %
|
2005
|
87.86
|
2006
|
87.65
|
2007
|
88.51
|
2008
|
82.29
|
2009
|
81.45
|
2010
|
81.56
|
2011
|
81.13
|
2012
|
80.39
|
2013
|
81.56
|
2014
|
80.20
|
While there is an obvious downward trend, the gross
profit margin % is extremely high, which means that most of the company’s
revenue results as profits. This is a good trait as it shows that the company
is not spending excessive money to undercut its competitors, advertising or
other competitive money wastage.
13. Return on assets, does it grow
or at least maintain?
Dec05
|
Dec06
|
Dec07
|
Dec08
|
Dec09
|
Dec10
|
Dec11
|
Dec12
|
Dec13
|
Dec14
|
9.03
|
10.84
|
16.58
|
10.66
|
11.71
|
12.78
|
12.59
|
12.32
|
15.90
|
11.01
|
Return on assets is defined by the net income
generated compared to invested asset. This can also be a factor to determine
how ‘smartly’ the company is using its funds for.
As we can see from the data, the average ROA is
12.34% for the past 10 years. This is a great value. A company with high ROA
like this will reward shareholders in the long run. The ROA values are also
rather stable without many fluctuations.
14. Dividends payout ratio
Dec05
|
Dec06
|
Dec07
|
Dec08
|
Dec09
|
Dec10
|
Dec11
|
Dec12
|
Dec13
|
Dec14
|
0.35
|
0.59
|
0.37
|
0.39
|
0.30
|
0.46
|
The dividends payout ratio is extremely little. This
means that only a small part of the group’s profit is used to pay back
shareholders as dividends. However, this value shouldn’t be confused with the
YIELD. For years of 2005 – 2008, the payout ratio is not stated clearly but is
still within the ranges of <1 from financial report data.
15. Shares buyback
The group has not done any shares buyback that is
known of.
16. Others / personal
opinion
The majority of shares (38.33%) are held by raffles
medical holdings (its parent company) and Mr Loo Choon Yong (10.11%), the co-founder
of raffles chain of healthcare. These shows align of interest between
shareholders and the management of the company, which is a good sign. This
means that there are no threats of hostile takeover for the company.
Given the dividend YIELD of the group is in the 1-3%
rate, compared to the payout ratio. This is a very good yield given how little
the company is paying out its profit as dividends. Since this is a growth
company/stock, the payout ratio is to be expected as the company is using most
of its funds for expansion both locally and overseas. With the past expansion
history of the company, it can be said that the management and vision of the
company is quite good in terms of expansion, and as shareholders we should take
it as a good sign that the company is holding most of the profits for expansion
instead of giving it out as dividends/share buybacks.
However, the price/book ratio of 4.386 is extremely
high. The P/E ratio of 36.817 and growth rate of 24.57% shows a PEG value of
1.49. These numbers shows that the company is currently overvalued and/or
investors are expecting much growth from the company. Given the past records of
the company, although it is currently overvalued, it is starting expansion into
various countries and if successful, the company true value might reach its
expected value soon and will probably continue to grow from there. The only
factor that isn’t showing a buy signal is its overvaluation. I feel that the
stock price will be heavily guided by whatever is happening in the current
expansion to china and Japan, should the expansion take off, the book value
will reach the trading value soon enough, with only the risk of failure of
expansion which will definitely take a toll on the company’s revenue/monies and
ultimately stock price.
IMO: 7/10
No comments:
Post a Comment