Latest Stock Buy or Sell? Make More Informed Decisions!

Yes. The one thing they alluded to in their commentary was the risk to the job market. With the government shutdown, a lot of the data was lagging and not available. We found out yesterday that the unemployment picture has worsened pretty significantly. That gives them some justification for what they did.

He's not exactly sure. With all of these monthly data points, what they typically do is release them and then adjust them over time. We need more of the points in sequence and then more robustness in different types of data.

Really, it was the federal government layoffs and early packages taken that spiked the number. If that's more of a one-off event, then things will tick back down. If there are more things in the pipeline, or more things happen in the private sector, then we'll see that number tick up.

One clear effect is that government spending and debt will increase significantly. This sort of plays into what the Fed is doing.

One thing that wasn't really highlighted was the quantitative tightening/easing cycle. They stopped tightening on December 1, it hasn't even been a month, and they're already easing. If you look at the magnitude of that easing ($25-30B a month) and where that gets you to over the next 24-36 months, it's a pretty significant injection of liquidity into the markets.

It will essentially help finance a portion of the government debt. Even if they maintain their same ratio of debt to total assets, they still need to be doing some easing just to maintain that ratio. If they don't, they are actually tightening (albeit indirectly). There's a huge mindset that they don't want to indirectly tighten, so what you could look for at a minimum is that they'll maintain a similar ratio of debt to total assets. 

That should bode well for liquidity in the markets. If there are hiccups along the way, you can expect that injections of liquidity would be turbo-charged.

Follows. Has done exceptionally well over last few years with food inflation. Real catalyst to unlocking profitability was when it acquired Shoppers Drug Mart -- a potent combination. Profitability has improved, generates significant free cashflow. Good business, fairly reasonable valuation. FCF yield is slightly north of 5%. Reasonable investment if you have your heart set.

He prefers ATD.

Holding company that owns Loblaw. When you go up a level to a holding company, you introduce other variables such as a holding company discount -- he tends to avoid them and go closer to the source. WN is buying shares of Loblaw to increase its ownership.

He prefers ATD.

His preference in the grocery/retail space.

Weighting is always a difficult thing. When you have a high-weight position and it works, it's great. Not so much when it doesn't work. Tough for him to comment without knowing an investor's particular situation, but this caller seems to know a lot about the company. That knowledge and insight help mitigate the risk when having a concentrated position. You have to know your stock well, otherwise you get hit by something.

Likes the name, doesn't own (but has in past). His preference in the space is ENB. But when you compare the two, PPL has a really strong growth profile and that's a really big positive. As for the valuation, it's quite reasonable. As is the payout ratio, so not a lot of dividend risk. Tends to trade at a bit of a discount relative to ENB because of its collection of midstream assets (not everything has the same contracted profile as an oil or gas pipeline).

Trades south of 10x cashflow. Well-protected dividend. Good growth. No problem owning this one at all.

Weighting is always a difficult thing. When you have a high-weight position and it works, it's great. Not so much when it doesn't work. Tough for him to comment without knowing an investor's particular situation, but this particular investor seemed to know a lot about the company. That knowledge and insight help mitigate the risk when having a concentrated position. You have to know your stock well, otherwise you get hit by something.

Its main assets are GWO and IGM. Those are owned in a holding company called Power Financial. Then there's one level up, which is POW. When you go up to the holding company, the market always attributes a discount to them. That introduces a variable that you can't control, as the discount can widen or narrow.

With this stock, you're two levels removed from the operating assets. Similar to the Loblaw/George Weston setup. He prefers to get closer to the source, and the ideal asset in this mix is GWO, which he owns.

The ideal asset in the mix of POW holdings is GWO. Not a buy today because of valuation, trading north of 12x PE. A bit rich given its growth profile. Valuations in the life insurance space have come up dramatically. He usually looks to buy around 10x PE.

Unique growth profile in mature markets, doing really well in US and Europe. Typically owns it as an income name, but among those names it has one of the best growth profiles (though weaker if you compared it to an actual growth name).

If you separate the valuation of COST and the business of COST, there aren't too many businesses that are better. Phenomenal business because it creates so much value for its customers, especially in these times of inflation. As for growth potential, still expanding into new markets, so really good growth profile.

Valuation becomes the sticking point. Trading at 40x PE, too rich for the cashflow. Doesn't think it'll get down to 30x PE, but perhaps 35x. For investment success in any stock, you really need to get earnings growth and multiple expansion. Those are the twin engines of your compounding. If you get earnings growth but it's less than expected, the multiple can contract and your gain is zero. Watch and wait on this one.

For investment success in any stock, you really need to get earnings growth and multiple expansion. Those are the twin engines of your compounding. If you get earnings growth but it's less than expected, the multiple can contract and your gain is zero. 

Follows both, has owned both in the past but not today. Quickest answer is not to invest in either. 

The reason against BCE is its growth profile. See his Top Picks for BIP.UN, an income name with a much stronger growth profile at a very attractive valuation.

Follows both, has owned both in the past but not today. Quickest answer is not to invest in either. 

The reason against BCE is its growth profile. See his Top Picks for BIP.UN, an income name with a much stronger growth profile at a very attractive valuation.

Question was on ATRL which he does not follow, so he proposed to compare STN vs. WSP

The two names he follows most closely are STN and WSP. He goes back and forth as to which he prefers. Both very well run. He wants pure engineering and construction, which are positioned where he likes in the infrastructure spend cycle. Very attractive profitability and cashflows in their services businesses. Valuations are almost identical, as are the FCF yields and growth profiles.

He might lean just slightly to STN, as it's a little bit smaller and so it has more room to grow.