Like most of the rest of the trucking industry, Landstar (LSTR) moved sharply lower on the news Friday from FedEx (FDX) and YRC Worldwide (YRCW) , briefly causing it to breach its 52-week low. Landstar has long been one of my favorite names, and I took the opportunity to buy some shares because I think the current valuation will be tough to beat. Don't get me wrong -- I'm not arguing that trucking revenues are about to ramp up across the board. As the chart below shows, the industry has been slowing since early 2006, and despite the little uptick in September, the year-over-year change was a decline of 2.3%. Demand for trucking services is bad, and the slowing U.S. consumer suggests that it will probably get worse before it gets better.
Industry Slowdown?Although Landstar reported a 3% decline in total revenue during the first nine months of 2007, the decline was mostly due to a falloff in one contract. The company provides disaster-relief services for FEMA, and the milder hurricane season in 2006 led to lower revenue in early 2007 than was experienced after Katrina and Rita for 2005/2006. According to Landstar's latest 10Q, revenue would have been up 5% excluding FEMA business in both years. Contrast that with the decline in overall industry revenues, and I smell market share gains. The industry may be slowing down, but I don't think Landstar is.Cheap GrowthOver the last 12 months, Landstar generated $167 million in free cash flow. Nearly all of its operating cash goes to share repurchases and dividends since the company isn't buying trucks. On a $2.1 billion enterprise value, that amounts to an 8% free-cash-flow yield -- more than twice the yield on Treasury bonds and a healthy risk premium in today's market. What's more, Landstar's 5% apples-to-apples growth in a bad year suggests the longer-term growth rate could be significantly higher. With today's price justified even without any growth, the prospect of an eventual return to double-digit growth rates gets my mouth watering. Sure, the P/E of 17 times is significantly higher than YRC's 6 times. But the lack of capital requirements, the absence of YRC's $1.5 billion in debt and the variable cost nature more than justify the higher P/E in my opinion. RELATED STORIESHewlett-Packard Preview: Expect a Good Quarter BEA Systems Finally Delivers Worrisome Comments From Network Appliance
At the time of publication, Trent was long Landstar, although positions may change at any time.William A. Trent, CFA, is a freelance equity analyst based in the New York metro area. He has been an equity analyst since 1996 and is co-author of Understanding and Evaluating Prospectuses, Offering Documents, and Proxy Statements. Under no circumstances does the information in this column represent a recommendation to buy or sell stocks. Trent appreciates your feedback; click here to send him an email.
Read our conflicts and disclosure policy. |
|
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
© 1996- TheStreet.com, Inc. All rights reserved. |