You are on page 1of 5

Target vs.

Wal-Mart Through the investment data that each of these large retail companies have it is apparent that Wal-Mart is a better investment option. The dividend/yield of Target is $1.72/2.72 !Target" and $1.##/2.$1 !Wal-Mart". This sho%s that Wal-Mart %ill pay a stoc&holder more money per stoc&' but their overall yield is slightly lo%er. (oo&ing at the price trend of Target and Wal-Mart though sho%s that Wal-Mart is currently doing better at $7)-#) per stoc& than Target' %hich has dropped from around that range to about $*) per stoc&. +ther aspects of the stoc& information from the t%o companies indicate that WalMart %ould be the prime choice %hile loo&ing into investing. The Wal-Mart beta of ).,* is significantly lo%er than that of Target' %hich is ).-1. This tells us that the stoc& price of Wal-Mart fluctuates less than it does %ith Target' %hich means it is a safer investment. The Wal-Mart ../ !price/earnings ratio" is also lo%er !10.* compared to 1$.," meaning that the profit compared to the stoc& price is greater. The /...1 !earnings per chare" of Wal-Mart at $$.1, also sho%s a better investment opportunity than Target at $0.10. Then there is the $2-%ee& range' %hich gives us the range of the stoc& price over the past year. The price has gone do%n a bit for both Target and Wal-Mart but %ith Wal-Mart it is a smaller drop !$7-.-*-*7.,7 compared to $7,.$)-$#.)1". The final important point to loo& at is the one-year target price' %hich sho%s the predicted percent increase in price in the ne2t year. With this aspect Target loo&s better %ith a 1, !$72.)) from $*,.21" percent increase and Wal-Mart at only - !$#2.)) from $70.#2". 3o%ever because of the higher chance of fluctuation and the uncertainty of %hat %ill really happen %ith stoc& prices this is hardly the most important aspect to loo& at. 4 find this to be interesting because form the little e2perience 4 have %ith WalMart the customer service is far from great and it is not the cleanliest of places either' %hile Target has perfectly fine customer service and is in my opinion and that of many other people 4 &no% altogether better. 4 thin& that their greater success comes from t%o ma5or attributes6 they are often strategically placed so sometimes it is your only option to shop at Wal-Mart and their merchandise is far cheaper than can be found at Target or pretty much any other place. With the beta' ../' and dividend/yield of Wal-Mart being better than those of Target in terms of investment it %ould be a better choice.

Merck vs. Pfizer 3aving no e2perience %ith either Merc& or .fi7er 4 am loo&ing only at the data given in regards to my opinion. (oo&ing at the dividend/yield' important %hen choosing %ho to invest in' Merc& loo&s li&e the better company. Merc& has a dividend/yield of $1.72/,.*0 %here .fi7er is only at $).-*/,.,0 ' meaning that per share that a stoc&holder buys from Merc& they are being paid 7* cents more than from a .fi7er stoc&' %hich %ould eventually add up.

The stoc& trends of both companies are going up strongly' but Merc& is e2celling more rapidly and is in general higher. Merc& has gone from $,)-,$ per share in 2)1) to about $$) in 2)1, %hile .fi7er has gone from around $1# per share to $,). +n top of this Merc& has a lo%er beta !).$0 compared to ).70" indicating they are more guaranteed to remain at a higher price. The ../ and the /...1 of the t%o companies contradict Merc& being the better choice ho%ever. Merc& has a relatively high ../ of 2#., considering that the average is about 1# %hile .fi7er has a nice lo% ../ of #.). This says that you %ill not ma&e so much profit of the high prices of the Merc& stoc&s. The /...1 of Merc& is $1.*7 compared to the $,.*1 of .fi7er emphasi7es this because it sho%s a greater profit per .fi7er share. The percentage in %hich each company is e2pected to gro% is the same' 10 though in price they are different !$$0.)) from $07.2- for Merc& and $,,.)) from $2#.72 from .fi7er." The $2-%ee& range88. (oo&ing at all of the components 4 feel that investing in Merc& %ould in the long run be a better option because the beta sho%s it is 9safer:' and you are paid more per share' there is a higher yield and the price trend is more promising.

Apple vs. Dell 4 have a lot of e2perience %ith ;pple and hardly any e2perience %ith <ell. ;s far as product goes 4 prefer ;pple because their products seems to function better overall than <ell. The dividend/yield of ;pple !$12.2)/2.0# " also presents as a better investment than the lo% numbers of <ell !$).,2/2.,1 ". The ../ too sho%s that a greater profit could be made from ;pple !12., compared to 1#.)". The /...1 of ;pple at $0).11 is e2ceptionally higher than <ell=s !and most companies"' %hich is only $).77 meaning that the earnings per share are far greater. The other investment information li&e the one-year target price and the $2-%ee& range also point to%ards ;pple as the better investment option. The one-year target price increase for ;pple is e2pected to be 1- !going from $0-2.#1 to $$-).))" the e2pectation for <ell on the other hand is 1 !going from $1,.#$ to $10.))". The $2-%ee& range88. The price trend for ;pple has not been great during this year' for though it rose from $2))-,)) per share in 2)1) to almost $7$) in 2)12 it dropped it $0)) this year !2)1,". <ell does not sho% the most reassuring data either' though it has gone up from the $--1) per share of 2)12 to $10 in 2)1, it has not gone up to the $1- it %as in 2)1)' also the overall price is much lo%er than ;pple. /ven %ith the drop in price per share ;pple seems to me to be a better choice in investment because of the high dividend/yield !%hich sho%s it is a successful company"' the lo% beta and ../' and the high /...1. 4 have heard both that the value of their stoc&s are almost guaranteed to go up at some point in the future and that it may go do%n greatly because of their current business strategies. >ut still based on the current information 4 %ould invest in them before going to <ell.

Hershey vs. Nestle The information on the investment status of ?estle is limited' so it is more difficult to determine %hich is the smarter option. (oo&ing at the t%o large chocolate !among other things" producing companies and their data it appears that ?estle might 5ust be the better option. The ../ of ?estle is 1#.22 compared to 3ershey' %hich is 2-.0' representing that a higher profit comes from ?estle. The /.1.. of ?estle is higher than that of 3ershey !$,.7) compared to $,.2)" better because it means higher earnings per share. The dividend/yield is also in their favor because it is at $2.11/,.1 rather than $1.-0/2.)* . This means that per share a shareholder is being paid 10 cents more for ?estle than 3ershey. The price trend of 3ershey has gone up steadily from $0$-$) per share in 2)1) to $1)) in 2)1,' %hich bodes %ell for them especially because their beta !).27" is comparatively lo% %hen loo&ing at the other companies. The $2-%ee& range88. The choice bet%een %hich of these t%o companies is a better investment is difficult' because although the ../' /.1..' and dividend/yield of ?estle are better than 3ershey it is some%hat suspicious that there is so little information for them. +ther than the limited one-year target price of 1 and the very high ../ their data does not loo& bad in comparison to the other companies. 3o%ever 4 thin& that in the end 4 %ould invest in ?estle' though really 4 feel no compulsion to support their company.

Home Depot vs. Lowes 4 have only ever been to (o%es once' and the 4tem 4 purchased there %as not of the same @uality as that that %e later purchased at 3ome <epot' though it %as probably cheaper. (oo&ing at investing the dividend/yield immediately tells me that 3ome <epot might be a better choice than (o%es. The 3ome <epot dividend/yield is $1.$*/2.)0 vs. the (o%es dividend/yield of $).72/1.0# . This indicates that you %ill ma&e more money from 3ome <epot' because of the $1.$* you %ill get per share bought and over time ma&e the money bac& that you paid for it !this %ould ta&e a lot longer %ith $).72 that is given by (o%es". >oth of the companies are steadily rising at about the same rate though 3ome <epot is %orth more being currently at $#).)) per share in 2)1, from the $,)-0) of 2)1). (o%es is no% %orth $,)-$) per share from the $2)-2$ of 2)1). The >eta is lo%er for 3ome <epot !).#, compared to 1.)$" %hich gives a better guarantee that they %ill continue at a higher profit rather than drop' it is more secure. The /...1 also sho%s 3ome <epot to be the better choice at $,.,- %here as (o%es is at $1.--. The only thing that (o%es really has in its favor is the one-year target price !1# compared to the 1) of 3ome <epot". The $2-%ee& range88. The higher e2pected percent increase from (o%es does little to s%ay my opinion

because really anything can happen %ith stoc&s. /ven though the ../ of 3ome <epot !22.$" it is also high for (o%es !20.$"' so 4 %ould definitely buy stoc&s from 3ome <epot instead of (o%es' %hen choosing bet%een the t%o' based on all this information. 4 thin& that it is because there are usually more 3ome <epot stores around and from my e2perience they have good customer service that they are a successful business %ith better stoc& value than (o%es.

ap vs. Aeropostale 4mmediately after loo&ing at the data from the t%o clothing companies it is apparent that Aap %ould be the better investment opportunity. There reason for this is that there is no profit coming from ;eropostale no ../' negative /...1' and the price per stoc& is no% near 7ero if not already there. Bor Aap the data sho%s a dividend/yield of $).#)/2.17 ' %hich is not great but better than ?il/?il of ;eropostale. The ../ is 1,.*' %hich is belo% the average of about 1# so its o&ay. The /...1 is high at $2.17 compared to the -$).2- of ;eropostale. The one-year target price of Aap is 22 !from $,*.#, to $0$.))". Bor ;eroposatale it is 12 !$#.-2 to $1).))". The price per share for Aap as risen slo%ly going from $2)-,) in 2)1) to $,)-0$ in 2)1,. 4 %ould %ithout a doubt choose Aap to invest in because even if their value is not great either there is some profit.

Whole !oo"s vs. #roger 4 much prefer Whole Boods to Croger though it is far more e2pensive and is not a brand li&e Croger that is offered in most traditional grocery stores. These aspects lead me to believe that Croger may be a better investment %hen loo&ing at stoc&s though. >ecause more people are probably able to purchase and shop for their products. Birst loo&ing at the dividend/yield Croger has a better offer of $).**/1.$# compared to that of Whole Boods at $).0)/).*$ this means that over time you may ma&e more money from being a Croger stoc&holder than a Whole Boods stoc&holder. The ../ of Croger is plenty lo%er !and much better" than that of Whole Boods as %ell !1,.- instead of 02.2". The beta seems to encourage more trust in Croger as %ell being at ).0$ vs. 1.)7. The /...1 is $,.)1 for Croger and $1.0$ for Whole Boods meaning that there are higher earnings per share for Croger. The price of the stoc&s for Whole Boods has risen from around $2) to about $*) gradually !from 2)1) to 2)1,". The price of Croger stoc&s has risen slo%ly as %ell from $2)-2$ in 2)1) to about $0) in 2)1,. The one-year target price suggests that Whole Boods %ill continue to rise from its already higher value 1) !$*1.1# from $$.))" %hile Croger %ill increase ).* only !$02.))

from $01.71". 4 thin& that mostly based on the ../ and the dividend/yield 4 %ould choose to invest in Croger. ;lso because there is no certainty that there %ill or %ill not be a rise in the price of the stoc&s of these t%o companies and the high beta of Whole Boods it is more reasonable and secure to invest in Croger.

Wells !argo vs. $a%k of America (oo&ing only at the dividend/yield and ../ it is apparent that Wells Bargo %ill give a stoc&holder more profit. The dividend/yield of Wells Bargo is $1.2)/2.-) compared to the $).)0/).2# of >an& of ;merica. The ../ is 11.2 vs. ,).- a huge difference' %hich sho%s that the earnings to price ratio for >an& of ;merica is probably hardy %orth it' at least for no%. The other data all signifies that Wells Bargo is better and that >an& of ;merica might not be fairing so %ell. The /...1 of Wells Bargo is $,.*- %hile it is only $).0* for >an& of ;merica. The stoc& prices are higher for Wells Bargo going from $2$-,$ in 2)1) to $,$-0$ bet%een 2)12 and 2)1,. Bor >an& of ;merica the stoc& prices dropped to almost 7ero bet%een 2)11 and 2)12 from the $2) they %ere %orth in 2)1) and have raised again to $1* in 2)1,. This is not surprising because the beta is e2tremely high !2.0,". The beta is fairly high for Wells Bargo also at 1.0). The $2-%ee& range88. 4 %ould invest in Wells Bargo long before 4 %ould invest in >an& of ;merica because the dividend/yield' beta' ../' /...1' and price trend all lean in favor of their company. 4 have no personal e2perience %ith either of these ban&s and do not &no% much about them either' but based on this information 4 %ould guess that the customer service of Wells Bargo out does that of >an& of ;merica unless there is some other factor.

You might also like