Here are some graphs: they show a bunch of companies placed according to the automatically generated Earnings-Power (vertical-axis) and Graham valuations (horizontal) from this site. EPV is supposed to consider the firm as it stands today, Graham as the firm it will grow into. AIUI. Overvalued is top left, Undervalued bottom right. No particular rationale for the choices of firms: some are people's picks for 2013, a few others chosen for quality, flakiness etc.
Now, surely some quantitative factor from the balance sheet will correspond to the valuations. Companies are wrongly valued for good reasons,right? So I've also culled all the other data relating to all these firms, so I can use some bit to colour in the tickers. This first one uses the Piotroski score [hope it fits the page ok..]:
And this one the ROE..
And so on. I'll be brief because I've a headache coming on from programming this: there's no bloody pattern! Not even the last one. The valuation methods Stockopedia provide seem really sensible - so why is there no bunching of quality in the overvaluation sector.. ? Please discuss.
I also do painting and decorating. :-Q