Investors are always on the lookout for untapped opportunities, especially in stocks that have been heavily discounted and now present promising opportunities for those prepared to wager on a recovery.
As the new year looms, a seasoned strategy, known as the Laggards trade, is witnessing a revival.
In its recent analysis, Goldman Sachs has shone a light on stocks that have trailed the broader market significantly on a year-to-date basis. Despite their underperformance, these Buy-rated securities hold considerable potential for robust gains in the upcoming year.
Laggards can often represent contrarian investment opportunities, as they may not have garnered bullish sentiment from investors yet, or the prevailing analyst consensus might be so low that even minor positive changes in fundamentals could result in significant performance gains.
The Laggard Phenomenon: The year 2023 has been a turbulent one for many stocks, with some sectors witnessing declines reminiscent of the tumultuous years of 2007 and 2020. However, history suggests a silver lining the laggards of one year often emerge as leaders in the first quarter of the next.
Goldman Sachs equity strategists, Deep Mehta and Tarun Lalwani, CFA, explained that despite a 37% YTD underperformance relative to the S&P 500 index, 2023s laggards could be next years leaders, as the market rally in November suggests signs of an early reversal.
Sector Shift: This years laggards differ from those of 2022, with Healthcare, Financials, and Industrials taking the lead. These stocks align with several key investment themes: low financial returns, lower quality scores, affordable valuations, and high growth prospects.Goldman Sachs Unveils 5 Clusters Of Stocks In The Laggards Trade
1) Laggards with Differentiated Bullish Views: These are Buy-rated stocks by Goldman Sachs analysts, who hold a contrarian opinion compared to less than half of Wall Street analysts. They have at least a 10% upside potential. Some of the stocks included in this group are as follows: Moderna Inc. MRNA : Upside to target 189%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -75% Pfizer Inc. PFE : Upside to target 66%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -63% Enphase Energy Inc. ENPH : Upside to target 48%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -79% Loading… Loading…
2) Laggards with Consensus-Defying Estimates: These stocks have Goldman Sachs estimates that significantly diverge from the consensus, suggesting a potential surprise factor. Highlighted below are some key stocks within this group: Darling Ingredients Inc. DAR : Upside to target 86%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -47% Shoals Technologies Group SHLS : Upside to target 89%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -60% ANGI Homeservices Inc. ANGI : Upside to target 84%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -16%
Read also: Will Novembers Turkey Rally Set Stage For Decembers Santa Claus Rally For Stocks?
3) Growth at Reasonable Valuations: These are Buy-rated laggards projected to have double-digit topline growth in 2024 and 2025, with a Price-Earnings-Growth ratio below 1.0. Included in this group are the following notable stocks: Array Technologies Inc. ARRY : Upside to target 89%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -60% First Solar Inc. FSLR : Upside to target 72%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -13%
4) Laggards with Rebounding Margins: These stocks are expected to show positive sales growth and improving operating margins in 2024 compared to 2023. The following represents a selection of stocks categorized in this group: Bath & Body Works Inc. BBWI : Upside to target 45%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -39% Sensata Technologies Holding ST : Upside to target 45%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -37%
5) Laggards with Superior CROCI: These are stocks with a consistent Cash Return on Capital Invested (CROCI) greater than the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC), indicating efficient capital use and profitability. Key stocks within this group are listed below: Aptiv PLC APTV : Upside to target 52%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -29% Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. BMY : Upside to target 38%, YTD underperformance vs. S&P 500 -50%
Read now: Golds Record High: Why Havent Gold Miners Followed Suit?
An independent review of the water industry is to recommend sweeping changes to the way the sector is managed, including the potential replacement of Ofwat with a strengthened body combining economic and environmental regulation.
Former Bank of England governor Sir Jon Cunliffe will publish the findings of the Independent Water Commission on Monday, with stakeholders across the industry expecting significant changes to regulation to be at its heart.
The existing regulator Ofwat has been under fire from all sides in recent years amid rising public anger at levels of pollution and the financial management of water companies.
Campaigners and politicians have accused Ofwat of failing to hold water operators to account, while the companies complain that its focus on keeping bills down has prevented appropriate investment in infrastructure.
In an interim report, published in June, Sir Jon identified the presence of multiple regulators with overlapping responsibilities as a key issue facing the industry.
While Ofwat is the economic regulator, the Environment Agency has responsibility for setting pollution standards, alongside the Drinking Water Inspectorate.
More on Environment
Related Topics:
Sir Jon’s final report is expected to include a recommendation that the government consider a new regulator that combines Ofwat’s economic regulatory powers with the water-facing responsibilities currently managed by the EA.
In his interim report, Sir Jon said options for reform ranged from “rationalising” existing regulation to “fundamental, structural options for integrating regulatory remits and functions”.
He is understood to have discussed the implications of fundamental reform with senior figures in industry and government in the last week as he finalised his report.
Environment Secretary Steve Reed is expected to launch a consultation on the proposals following publication of the commission report.
The commission is also expected to recommend a “major shift” in the model of economic regulation, which currently relies on econometric modelling, to a supervisory approach that takes more account of individual company circumstances.
On Monday, the government’s long-awaited review into the UK’s water industry will finally report.
The expectation is that it will recommend sweeping changes – including the abolition of the regulator, Ofwat.
But frustrated customers of the water companies could rightly complain that the process of taking on this failing sector and its regulator has been slow and ineffective.
They may be forgiven for going further and suggesting that how Labour has dealt with water is symbolic of their inability to make an impact across many areas of public life, leaving many of their voters disappointed.
This is an industry that has been visibly and rapidly declining for decades, with the illegal sewage dumping and rotting pipes in stark contrast with the vast salaries and bonuses paid out to their executives.
It doesn’t take a review to see what’s gone wrong. Most informed members of the public could explain what has happened in a matter of minutes.
And yet, despite 14 years in opposition with plenty of time to put together a radical plan, a review is exactly what the government decided on before taking on Ofwat.
Month after month, they were asked if they believed the water industry regulator was fit for purpose despite the obvious disintegration on their watch. Every time the answer was ‘yes’.
As in so many areas of government, Labour, instead of acting, needed someone else to make the decision for them, meaning that it has taken over a year to come to the simple conclusion that the regulator is in fact, not fit for purpose.
As they enter their second year in office, maybe this can provide a lesson they desperately need to learn if they want to turn around their fortunes.
That bold decisions do not require months of review, endless consultations, or outside experts to endlessly analyse the problem.
They just need to get on with it. Voters will thank them.
Sir Jon has said the water industry requires long-term strategic planning and stability in order to make it attractive to “low-risk, low-return investors”.
The water industry has long complained that the current model, in which companies are benchmarked against a notional model operator, and penalised for failing to hit financial and environmental standards, risks a “doom loop”.
Thames Water, currently battling to complete an equity process to avoid falling into special administration, has said the imposition of huge fines for failing to meet pollution standards is one of the reasons it is in financial distress.
Publication of the Independent Commission report comes after the Environment Agency published figures showing that serious pollution incidents increased by 60% in 2024, and as Thames Water imposes a hosepipe ban on 15m customers.
Ofwat, Water UK and the Department for the Environment all declined to comment.
On June 6, online real estate service Opendoor was so desperate to get its beaten-down stock price back over $1 and stay listed on the Nasdaq that management proposed a reverse split, potentially lifting the price of each share by as much as 50 times.
The stock inched its way up over the next five weeks.
Then Eric Jackson started cheerleading.
Jackson, a hedge fund manager who was bullish on Opendoor years earlier when the company appeared to be thriving and was worth roughly $20 billion, wrote on X on Monday that his firm, EMJ Capital, was back in the stock.
“@EMJCapital has taken a position in $OPEN — and we believe it could be a 100-bagger over the next few years,” Jackson wrote. He added later in the thread that the stock could get to $82.
It’s a long, long way from that mark.
Opendoor shares soared 189% this week, by far their best weekly performance since the company’s public market debut in late 2020. The stock closed on Friday at $2.25. The stock’s highest-volume trading days on record were Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of this week.
Jackson said in an interview on Thursday that the bulk of his firm’s Opendoor purchases came when the stock was in the 70s and 80s, meaning cents, and he’s bought options as well for his portfolio.
Nothing has fundamentally improved for the company since Jackson’s purchases. Opendoor remains a cash-burning, low-margin business with meager near-term growth prospects.
What has changed dramatically is Jackson’s online influence and the size of his following. The more he posts, the higher the stock goes.
“There’s a real hunger for buying the next big thing,” Jackson told CNBC, adding that investors like to find the “downtrodden.”
It’s something Jackson’s firm, based in Toronto, has in common with Opendoor.
When Opendoor went public through a special purpose acquisition company in 2020, it was riding a SPAC wave and broader gains driven by low interest rates and Covid-era market euphoria. Investors pumped money into the riskiest assets, lifting money-losing tech upstarts to astronomical valuations.
Opendoor’s business involved using technology to buy and sell homes, pocketing the gains. Zillow tried and failed to compete.
Opendoor shares peaked at over $39 in Feb. 2021 for a market cap just above $22.5 billion. But by the end of that year, the shares were trading below $15, before collapsing 92% in 2022 to end the year at $1.16.
Rising interest rates hammered the whole tech sector, hitting Opendoor particularly hard as increased borrowing costs reduced demand for homes.
Jackson, similarly, had a miserable 2022, coinciding with the worst year for the Nasdaq since 2008. Jackson said his key client withdrew its money at the end of the year, and “I’ve been small ever since.”
‘Epic comeback’
While his assets under management remain minimal, Jackson’s reputation for getting in early to a rebound story was burnished by the performance of Carvana.
The automotive e-commerce platform lost 98% of its value in 2022 as investors weighed the likelihood of bankruptcy. In the middle of that year, with Carvana still far from bottoming out, Jackson expressed his bullishness. He told CNBC that April that he liked the stock, and then promoted its recovery on a podcast in June. He also said he liked Opendoor at the time.
Investors willing to stomach further losses in 2022 were rewarded with a 1,000% gain in 2023, and a lot more upside from there. The stock closed on Friday at $347.52, up from a low of $3.72 in Dec. 2022, and almost triple its price at the time of Jackson’s appearance on CNBC in April of that year.
After Carvana’s 2022 slide, “then obviously began an epic comeback,” Jackson said. Opendoor, meanwhile, “continued to roll down the mountain,” he said.
Jackson said that the fallout of 2022 led him to pursue a different method of stockpicking. He started hiring a small team of developers, which is now four people, to build out artificial intelligence models. The firm has experimented with several models —some have worked and some haven’t — but he said the focus now is using what he’s learned from Carvana to find “100x” opportunities.
In addition to Opendoor, Jackson has been promoting IREN, a provider of power for bitcoin mining and AI workloads, and Cipher Mining, which is in a similar space. He’s seen his following on Elon Musk‘s social media site X, which he said was stuck for years between 32,000 and 34,000, swell to almost 50,000. And after a lengthy lull, investors are reaching out to him to try and put money into his fund, he said.
Jackson has a lot riding on Opendoor, a company that saw revenue and number of homes sold slip in the first quarter from a year earlier, and racked up almost $370 million in losses over the past four quarters.
In early June, Opendoor announced plans for a reverse split — ranging from 1 for 10 to 1 for 50 — to “give us optionality in preserving our listing on Nasdaq.” With the stock now well over $1, such a move appears less necessary, as shareholders prepare to vote on the proposal on July 28.
“I think it’s a terrible idea,” said Jackson. “Those things usually further cement a company’s move into oblivion rather than hail some big revival.”
Opendoor didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Banking on growth
Analysts are projecting a more than 5% drop in revenue this year, followed by 20% growth in 2026 and 12% expansion in 2017, according to LSEG. Losses are expected to narrow over that stretch.
Jackson said his analysis factors in projections of $11.5 billion in revenue for 2029, which would be well over double the company’s expected sales for this year. He looked at the multiples of companies like Zillow and Carvana, which he said trade for 4 to 7 times forward revenue. Opendoor’s forward price-to-sales ratio is currently well below 1.
With Zillow and Redfin having exited the instant-buying home market, Opendoor faces little competition in allowing homeowners to sell their property online for cash, rather than going through an extended bidding, sales and closing process.
Jackson is banking on revenue growth and increased market share to lead to a profitable business that will push investors to value the company with a multiple somewhere between Zillow and Carvana. At $82, Opendoor would be worth about $60 billion, which is roughly 5 times projected 2029 revenue.
Jackson said his model assumes that “like Carvana, Opendoor can prove that it can permanently turn the tide and get to sustained profitability” so that the “market multiple would get reassessed.”
In the meantime, he’ll keep posting on X.
On Friday, Jackson wrote a thread consisting of 11 posts, recounting the challenge of having “99.5% of my AUM” disappear overnight after his primary investor pulled out in 2022.
“Translation: he fired me for losing him too much money,” Jackson wrote. He said he almost shut down the fund, and was even encouraged to do so by his wife and accountant.
Now, Jackson is using his recent momentum on social media to try and attract investor money, while still reminding prospects that he could lose it.
“All I have is my reputation,” he wrote, “and, unless I keep picking good stocks, it will be gone.”