Should I Invest In ARM Holdings Plc?

Published in Company Comment on 13 February 2013

Can ARM Holdings plc's (LON: ARM) total return beat the wider market?

To me, capital growth and dividend income are equally important. Together, they provide the total return from any share investment and, as you might expect, my aim is to invest in companies that can beat the total return delivered by the wider market.

To put that aim into perspective, the FTSE 100 has provided investors with a total return of around 3% per annum since January 2008.

Quality and value

If my investments are to outperform, I need to back companies that score well on several quality indicators and buy at prices that offer decent value.

So this series aims to identify appealing FTSE 100 investment opportunities and today I'm looking at ARM Holdings (LSE: ARM) (NASDAQ: ARMH.US), which describes itself as a leading semiconductor intellectual property (IP) supplier. Many of the world's digital electronic products contain the processors and electronic components the company designs.

With the shares at 922p, ARM's market cap. is £12,700 million.

This table summarises the firm's recent financial record:

Year to December20082009201020112012
Revenue (£m)299305407492577
Net cash from operations (£m)10197176194157
Adjusted earnings per share5.66p5.45p9.34p12.72p14.93p
Dividend per share2.2p2.42p2.9p3.48p4.5p

The recent full-year results showed cracking business and financial progress at ARM, once again. Investors in ARM are used to this kind of result, thanks to many equipment manufactures adopting the firm's technology designs. Devices such as micro-controllers, medical devices, computers and smart phones all end up with embedded ARM technology, and a main-stream adoption of devices such as tablets and smart phones by consumers has boosted sales and profit margins yet further: ARM's most technical, and therefore most profitable, designs become necessary to make cutting-edge equipment work.

ARM sells intellectual property (IP) rather than electronic components. Rather than become encumbered with the costs and challenges of manufacturing, the firm licenses its technology to leading semiconductor and equipment manufacturers, which incorporate ARM's processor and other technology designs in advanced, low-energy chips suitable for modern electronic devices. As well as licensing fees, ARM earns an on-going royalty as the end-products sell.

It's a successful formula, which has led to ARM's lofty valuation. I remember looking at the shares back in about 2005. They looked expensive to me then and I didn't buy, but they've multi-bagged since, so a traditional valuation approach caused me to miss out. ARM holds a key position in the markets it serves and, in that respect, appears to have a strong competitive advantage over any potential rivals.

ARM's total-return potential

Let's examine five indicators to help judge the quality of the company's total-return potential:

1. Dividend cover: earnings covered last year's dividend more than three times.  5/5

2. Borrowings: at the last count, there was net cash on the balance sheet.  5/5

3. Growth: revenue, earnings and cash flow (ignoring prepayments) have been growing.  5/5

4. Price to earnings: a forward 39, looks generous given growth and yield forecasts.  2/5

5. Outlook: robust recent trading and a positive outlook.  5/5

Overall, I score ARM 22 out of 25, which encourages me to believe that the firm has potential to out-pace the wider market's total return, going forward.

Foolish Summary

ARM scores strongly on the business-quality metrics of dividend cover, borrowings, growth and outlook. As usual, this strength has been recognised-and-then-some in the valuation. The shares have had a good run recently, but I'm happy to put the company on my watch list until the share price consolidates.

I really should invest in Arm, but not right now! Ideally, I'd like to get into an investment before explosive growth and that looks possible with a share that one of the Fool's top investment writers has uncovered. He has put his money where his mouth is by investing and believes the share is the "Motley Fools Top Growth Share for 2013". In this new Fool report, you can discover how the firm has re-envisioned itself to allow for tremendous growth along new horizons. Right now, the report is free to download and tells you exactly why our expert has invested in, and expects strong growth from, this changing company with a strong pedigree. To get your copy, click here.

> Kevin does not own shares in ARM Holdings.

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

normanicus 14 Feb 2013 , 9:16am

You would be better off investing in a baker. They make more on a loaf of bread than ARM makes on one of its cores. That is the problem with this company. Wonderful products, market leader, great opportunities for growth but no wheeler dealer to make sure they get top dollar for their product.

Another problem is that one road to riches, a takeover, seems impossible without destroying its neutrality which gains it industry wide support.

An addendum: don't buy Intel or AMD. The increasing power of ARM based chips, the impending crushing of the PC market by more powerful tablets, oncoming server products, together with ARM's impossible to match pricing, guarantees their demise.

licence 14 Feb 2013 , 10:24am

"You would be better off investing in a baker. They make more on a loaf of bread than ARM makes on one of its cores."

I assume these comments are meant to be a joke but on the off chance they are serious and/or someone makes the mistake of taking them seriously

As long as you can find a baker who sells 8.5 billion loaves per year, is growing those sales at 20% per annum, employs only 2,392 to produce those billions of loaves and has operating margins of 45-48% then yes go for it. Give me a shout if you find that baker.

ANuvver 14 Feb 2013 , 11:51am

normanicus:

Per your addendum, barging Intel off the server market would be an impressive feat for anyone. In that respect, I regard INTC as a semi-utililty (and a nice way of generating dollar income for a UK-based investor). I think there will certainly be increased competition for server chips, but don't forget that for every improvement ARM makes in speed, INTC is increasing its lead, while also moving towards them on power efficiency.

As to the issue of the impending death of the PC - not so sure about the current "keep taking the tablets" mass wisdom. Those tempted to make "buggy whip" comparisons might reflect on the fact that we still use a keyboard layout originally designed to slow a typist down and stop the levers from jamming.

If you could have the optional functionality and performance of both a tablet and a laptop in a single device at a similar price point, why would you opt for just a tablet? Because it's cool?

paulgmoody 15 Feb 2013 , 9:54am

About the bakers....some Dec 2011 figures from Greggs (GRG). Revenue £701m, EPS 39.5p and divi 13.9p per share. In money terms throws a custard pie in the face of ARM's 2011 figures in the article. Revenue or profit per unit sold is one thing but money in your hand is another.

ANuvver comments - I agree it will be interesting to watch how Intel and ARM encroach on each other's traditional businesses and technical advantages

Paul - long on GRG and ARM

licence 15 Feb 2013 , 1:54pm

Revenue £701m, EPS 39.5p and divi 13.9p per share. In money terms throws a custard pie in the face of ARM's 2011 figures in the article. Revenue or profit per unit sold is one thing but money in your hand is another.



I shouldn't really need to point this out but there are 13.6 times more shares issued in ARM than GRG so if ARM had the same number of shares issued as GRG then the 2011 EPS and Dividend figures would be 13.6 times higher

That is

EPS 173p
Divi 47.3p

licence 15 Feb 2013 , 4:06pm

And to emphasise something else

In 2011 ARM generated revenues of £232,500 per employee but for GRG that figure was £35,000. The net cash per employee for ARM was £91,600 but GRG's net cash per employee ws £3,650

GRG is a fine business doing very well but by all possible measures ARM is a massively superior business and business model.

paulgmoody 19 Feb 2013 , 3:11pm

Easy license, just having a bit of fun with the baker's comparison. We have been comparing apples with oranges in every sense (or chip design licensing with bread if you prefer)

ARM has a great business and model and as you point out the cash generated per employee is remarkable compared with GRG. How does ARM compare with its sector's peers I wonder?

I think the 'money in your pocket' from the divi aspect of the investor's POV is still relevant. There are 13.6 times the amount of ARM shares in issue compared with GRG, as you note. Given the share price difference with GRG, it's a big outlay on ARM shares to get an equivalent divi. As ARM is a 'growth share' one has to be confident that the growth in share price in the long term is justified if the shares are sold to realise their worth

licence 19 Feb 2013 , 6:12pm

I think the 'money in your pocket' from the divi aspect of the investor's POV is still relevant. There are 13.6 times the amount of ARM shares in issue compared with GRG, as you note. Given the share price difference with GRG, it's a big outlay on ARM shares to get an equivalent divi. As ARM is a 'growth share' one has to be confident that the growth in share price in the long term is justified if the shares are sold to realise their worth


If your earlier point was actually about dividend yield then I wouldn't have been able to challenge the supposition

However, clearly ARM is not, at today's prices, purchased on the basis of its dividend yield but I am always interested in the thought process which chooses a company for its dividend yield. If 12 months ago you'd bought GRG for its dividend yield and sold today you would have lost more of your capital than you had earned in dividends - even if you ignore any tax due on the dividend.

If you'd bought ARM 12 months ago and sold today you would have pocketed a 60+% capital gain. And some dividends.

paulgmoody 20 Feb 2013 , 5:41pm

licence - I can offer you my personal perspective on dividend yield as follows

I am looking to ultimately develop a portfolio for income in retirement and I am at the start of a 20+ year plan. As a starter point in choosing companies for yield I consider one that provides a yield at or slightly above the FTSE100 average, its business being run well with (hopefully) a long term future. I would also like to see a good record of increasing dividends over time, at a rate at least equal to or higher than inflation and that the dividend is well covered (dividend cover/free cash flow cover etc.). For these sorts of companies I have to accept that capital gain is not the big attraction and may be modest or minimal over time.

Ideally I would like to hold these companies for the (very) long term but if there are business situations that substantially affect (for the worse) why I bought the shares initially then I would have to consider selling and re-investing elsewhere.

Hope this helps with your views

Paul

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.