Connect with us

Business

3 Monster Growth Stocks That Could Reach New Highs

Published

on

3 Monster Growth Stocks That Could Reach New HighsOut on Wall Street, things are always changing. Share prices fluctuate, new players make their market debuts, the macro environment gets shaken up and long-term trends shift. That said, one thing remains the same: growth is the name of the game. Growth stocks consistently score a spot on investors’ wish lists, given their potential to deliver returns. This growth potential goes above and beyond the norm, as these plays have already posted some spectacular gains in 2020, with the upside set to keep on coming in the long run. Knowing what you’re looking for is one thing, but how are investors supposed to find these opportunities? One strategy is to take a cue from Wall Street pros. Bearing this in mind, we used TipRanks’ database during our search for exciting growth names, according to the analyst community. Locking in on three stocks that fit the bill, each analyst-backed ticker stands to notch more gains on top of their impressive year-to-date climbs. Here are all of the details. Sunnova Energy International (NOVA) First up we have Sunnova Energy International, which is one of the top providers of residential solar and energy storage services. Even though it has already jumped 160% year-to-date, several analysts think this name has more room to run. After speaking with NOVA’s founder and CEO John Berger, five-star analyst Joseph Osha, of JMP Securities, is even more confident in its long-term growth prospects, noting the “stock appears significantly undervalued.” Highlighting the storage business in particular, the analyst believes it is a major point of strength. “NOVA has been effective at driving storage attach rates higher, and has managed to make its dealer-focused business model perform well. The demand environment for storage has strengthened during the last 60 days, and we believe that we may be at an inflection point for the industry,” Osha commented. Looking more closely at attach rates, the figure landed at 34% in Q2. Part of this strong result was driven by the company’s move into island markets, with Berger mentioning that the attach rates in Hawaii, Guam, Saipan and Puerto Rico are effectively 100%. Additionally, rates are improving in Texas and Florida. Expounding on this, Osha stated, “Aggregating all of that together yields a 34% number that Mr. Berger believes is going to grow, albeit with very different dynamics in different markets. We also note that NOVA is selling storage to existing customers, and those sales are not reflected in the stated attach rate.” Reflecting more positives, Osha says NOVA’s relationships with Tesla and Generac set it apart, with it also choosing the ideal dealer partners. What’s more, the overall storage market appears solid, and cell manufactures are struggling to keep up with the demand. To this end, Berger argues the space is “as strong as you think it would be with attach rates continuing to rise in new geographies and revenue per customer growing as well.” While some investors have brought up concerns regarding competition from Sunrun (RUN), Osha thinks that even though RUN’s approach is working relatively well, the “smaller developers may lose out” in the end. As a result, the analyst sees room for a larger valuation for NOVA. In line with his optimistic approach, Osha stayed with the bulls, reiterating a Market Outperform rating and $43 price target. Investors could be pocketing a gain of 48%, should this target be met in the twelve months ahead. (To watch Osha’s track record, click here) Are other analysts in agreement? They are. Only Buy ratings, 10 to be exact, have been issued in the last three months. Therefore, the message is clear: NOVA is a Strong Buy. Given the $33.70 average price target, shares could surge 16% in the next year. (See Sunnova Energy International stock analysis on TipRanks) Big Lots (BIG) As a closeout retailer, Big Lots offers its customers everything from groceries and household essentials to furniture and electronics at an affordable price. With a solid standing going into 2021, some members of the Street believe its 87% year-to-date gain is only the beginning. Representing Piper Sandler, five-star analyst Peter Keith tells clients that going forward, “the set-up remains highly favorable.” The company’s guidance for Q3 comps was above his estimate, but the call for EPS of $0.50-$0.70 (versus Keith’s $0.12 forecast) was a major surprise. “Not only has Q3 historically been a negative EPS quarter, but also BIG is guiding huge EPS upside despite ~$12 million of incremental rent expense (from selling its DC’s) and ~$10 million of COVID expenses,” Keith noted. To this end, the analyst bumped up his Q4 comp estimate. Keith explained, “Q4 is setting up to be quite strong, the move back into discretionary closeouts couldn’t be better timed, our survey work continues to show elevated demand for home furnishings, and any positive impact from the new Chief Merchant (who joined in late July) has not yet impacted the sales trend.” When it comes to closeout activity, new CMO Jack Pestello has helped strengthen BIG’s efforts in closeouts, with Keith already noticing compelling offerings during store checks. Additionally, the reduction of promos should bode well for the retailer. BIG has cut the number of promo days in half in Q3 2020, when compared to Q3 2019. Therefore, although BIG is guiding for flattish gross margins year-over-year, there is room for upside, in Keith’s opinion. On top of this, its inventory position could be on the mend. According to management, most categories have had some inventory constraints in Q3, but vendors are catching up with demand, especially in key segments like furniture, home office and small appliances. Adding to the good news, a $500 million share repurchase authorization was announced, which Keith argues should “add some juice to EPS over the coming quarters.” Everything that BIG has going for it convinced Keith to maintain his Overweight rating. In addition to the call, he left the price target at $75, suggesting 40% upside potential. (To watch Keith’s track record, click here) Turning to the rest of the Street, opinions are split evenly. With 3 Buys and 3 Holds assigned in the last three months, the word on the Street is that BIG is a Moderate Buy. At $60.33, the average price target implies 12% upside potential. (See Big Lots stock analysis on TipRanks) Amicus Therapeutics (FOLD) Last but not least we have Amicus Therapeutics, which develops therapies for ultra-orphan diseases, including lysosomal storage disorders (LSDs). Up 77% year-to-date, even more growth could be on tap for this healthcare name, so says multiple Street pros. Even though it boasts a next generation enzyme replacement therapy in Phase 3, one of its gene therapy assets has received significant attention. During the CNSA conference, FOLD presented additional follow-up data from its Phase 1/2 CLN6 Battens gene therapy program. The program is evaluating AT-GTX-501, its gene therapy designed for use in CLN6 Batten disease, which is a fatal condition where children experience rapid and progressive decline in cognitive and motor function. It has a worldwide population of roughly 1,000 patients.  The presentation included incremental interim safety and efficacy data. Based on the safety data for 13 patients treated with the candidate, the therapy was well tolerated. It should be noted that five patients reported eleven Grade 3 SAEs, including four that were considered to be potentially treatment-related. These included vomiting, fever and upper abdominal pain, which are symptoms frequently seen with AAV gene therapy administration. Weighing in for Cowen, five-star analyst Ritu Baral argues the fact that immunogenicity to AAV9 or CLN6 was not observed is an important takeaway. As for the efficacy data, the results for twelve patients that reached the 12-month timepoint and eight that hit the 24-month timepoint were analyzed against age-matched natural history. On the Hamburg Motor and Language (HM&L) Aggregate score, which assesses ambulation and speech, the mean rate of decline in treated patients was much lower compared to natural history over the same time period. Digging a bit deeper, at the 12-month timepoint, the mean rate of decline in treated subjects was 0.4 points, versus 1.2 points in natural history subjects. At the 24-month timepoint, the mean rate of decline was 0.6 points in treated subjects, compared to 2.4 points in the natural history participants. What’s more, management stated that 63% of natural history patients saw an additional 2-point drop on the HM&L score two years after their first decline, while only 13% of AT-GTX-501 gene therapy recipients experienced the same.  What does all of this mean? “We think this update is incrementally positive and demonstrates the durability of AT-GTX-501’s efficacy out to two years. Interim efficacy results show nominally statistically significant and very likely clinically meaningful slowing of disease progression over 24 months in CLN6 Battens… The natural history dataset was collected was a relatively recent chart review by the same investigator as the FOLD study, and therefore we believe is likely reliable,” Baral commented. If that wasn’t enough, the natural history control analysis could be enough for U.S. registration. “We believe given the rarity and severity of CLN6, that a prospective PBO controlled trial is not feasible. We believe the natural history data in the disease is rapidly solidifying into a body of evidence that will be meaningful to both FDA and EMA,” Baral explained. Given all of the above, Baral has high hopes. Along with an Outperform rating, she keeps a $31 price target on the stock. This target puts the upside potential at 81%. (To watch Baral’s track record, click here) Other analysts seem to echo Baral’s sentiment. 3 Buys and no Holds or Sells add up to a Strong Buy consensus rating. Based on the average price target of $23.67, the upside potential comes in at 38%. (See Amicus Therapeutics stock analysis on TipRanks) Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the featured analysts. The content is intended to be used for informational purposes only. It is very important to do your own analysis before making any investment.


Lyron Foster is a Hawaii based African American Musician, Author, Actor, Blogger, Filmmaker, Philanthropist and Multinational Serial Tech Entrepreneur.

Continue Reading
Comments

Business

17 Ways You Can Develop New Habits and Improve Your Life

Published

on

It’s possible to adapt to new ideas and habits if you’re willing to try.

Continue Reading

Business

Walmart sues government to pre-empt allegations it helped fuel opioid crisis

Published

on

Walmart Inc. sued the federal government in an effort to preempt regulators’ claims that the retailer added fuel to the U.S.’s opioid crisis by filling suspicious painkiller prescriptions in its pharmacies.

The world’s largest retailer argues in the suit that the U.S. Justice Department and Drug Enforcement Administration is scapegoating the chain to divert attention from the agencies’ failures to effectively address the public-health crisis over opioids.

Watchdog groups have “meticulously cataloged” the ways regulators have “failed to safeguard the public from improper diversion of prescription opioids,” Walmart’s lawyers said in the 54-page complaint. Walmart indicated it sued the government in anticipation of the DOJ filing its own lawsuit alleging the retailer mishandled the highly addictive pills. The company wants a judge to remove “unacceptable uncertainty” about its practices.

A spokesperson for the Justice Department didn’t immediately respond to calls for comment after regular business hours. James Pokryfke, a DEA spokesman, declined to comment. The complaint comes a day after federal prosecutors announced an $8.3 billion deal with drugmaker Purdue Pharma LP under which the company will plead guilty to criminal charges over its marketing of its opioid-based OxyContin painkiller.

Walmart has been promoting its health-services offering in the U.S. — where care is expensive and the insurance system is complex. The company has announced plans to expand its low-cost clinics in Georgia and the Chicago area.

Walmart sued the government in Sherman, Texas — the same district in which federal prosecutors once weighed hitting the chain with criminal charges over its opioid-dispensing practices, according to ProPublica. Joe Brown, the former U.S. Attorney for east Texas, threatened to indict the retailer for intentionally supplying doctor-run pill mills that routinely wrote hundreds of prescriptions for opioid painkillers, according to the report. DOJ officials in Washington nixed the indictments, ProPublica said.

Maureen Smith, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office in Sherman didn’t immediately return a call seeking comment. Brown, who stepped down in May, didn’t return a call and email seeking comment. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier on the suit.

Walmart has been sued by more than 2,000 states, cities and counties seeking to recoup billions in tax dollars spent battling the fallout from the opioid crisis. The retailer, along with pharmacy chains, was set to face a federal trial in Cleveland over its opioid handling, but the case was delayed by the Covid-19 outbreak.

Local government officials claim Walmart and companies such as CVS Health Corp., Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc.and Rite Aid Corp intentionally turned a blind eye to suspiciously large opioid prescriptions to ramp up billions in profits.

In its suit, Walmart said it has a robust system for monitoring opioid prescriptions and federal regulators are making unreasonable demands on the chain.

“DOJ and DEA are placing pharmacists and pharmacies in an untenable position by threatening to hold them liable for violating DOJ’s unwritten expectations for handling opioid prescriptions—expectations that are directly at odds with state pharmacy and medical practice laws,” the company said.

The case is Walmart Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice, 20-cv-00817, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas (Sherman).(Updates with details on opioid suits against Walmart starting in eighth paragraph)

–With assistance from Chris Strohm and Laurel Calkins.

More must-read finance coverage from Fortune:

Continue Reading

Business

Trump claims at debate that China is paying for farm subsidies. In fact, U.S. taxpayers are footing the bill

Published

on

Our mission to help you navigate the new normal is fueled by subscribers. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.

At Thursday’s U.S. presidential debate, President Donald Trump falsely claimed in an exchange with rival Joe Biden that China is paying American farm subsidies.

“I just gave $28 billion to our farmers,” Trump said.

“[That’s] taxpayers’ money,” Biden, the Democratic nominee, interjected. “[The money] didn’t come from China.”

Trump objected: “No, no. You know who the taxpayer is? It’s called China. China pays $28 billion, and you know what they did to pay it, Joe? They devalued their currency and they also paid up, and you know got the money? Our farmers, our great farmers, because they were targeted.”

Subscribe to Eastworld for weekly insight on what’s dominating business in Asia, delivered free to your inbox.

Trump’s claim that China paid for American farm subsidies is false, given that the U.S. has drawn from its own government coffers to pay for subsidies to bolster farmers hurt by the U.S.-China trade war. It is also unclear how his claims of China ‘paying up’ or ‘devaluing its currency’ relate to U.S. government subsidies to American farmers.

Trump’s January phase I trade deal with China—a first step in resolving the years-long trade war—included a vow from China to vastly increase its purchases of American farm goods. Such action would have benefited U.S. farmers, but as of now, China is far behind on meeting its targets.

Farm relief

The trade war began in July 2018, when the Trump administration levied $34 billion in tariffs on Chinese goods, meaning it cost more for American companies to import products from China. In response, China imposed a 25% tariff on U.S. soybeans and other agricultural products, meaning American goods became more expensive for Chinese importers. Subsequent rounds of tit-for-tat measures followed, which raised China’s tariffs on soybeans to as high as 33%; Chinese tariffs on U.S. pork products reached 72%.

Trump often claims that China paid the tariffs his administration imposed on Chinese goods. It’s true that the U.S. Treasury has collected billions of dollars in tariffs in recent years, but that money is paid by U.S. importers of Chinese goods, not by Chinese entities or China itself.

In reality, tariffs are intended to be a deterrent. Those imposed by the Trump White House made it more expensive for American companies to buy Chinese items; the idea being that American companies would import fewer Chinese goods if the products became more expensive, which would ultimately hurt China. American companies did seek out alternatives to Chinese products after the tariffs went into effect, but they also responded by raising their prices to cover the added cost and by cutting other expenses, like jobs. In June 2019 alone, a group of trade associations found that Chinese tariffs cost U.S. businesses $3.4 billion. By the time of the trade deal in January 2020, Trump administration tariffs had cost U.S. companies tens of billions of dollars.

The $28 billion figure that Trump mentioned on Thursday appears to refer to the $28 billion in subsidies the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) allotted to American farmers between 2018 and 2019. The USDA rolled out the subsidy mechanism, called a Market Facilitation Program, in 2018 to provide relief to farmers whose crops had been targeted by China’s retaliatory trade war tariffs.

Corn And Soy Fields Ahead Of USDA WASDE Report
A farmer pulls a planter through a soybean field in this aerial photograph taken over a farm near Buda, Illinois, U.S., on Tuesday, July 2, 2019. The U.S. trade war with China hit American soybean farmers especially hard.
Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Just as U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods made the items more expensive in the U.S., China’s retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods made American products more expensive in China. And in this instance too, the added cost was a deterrent. Instead of importing, say, soybeans from the U.S., Chinese companies imported them from other countries, such as Brazil. That was bad news for U.S. soybean farmers, who exported roughly 25% of their harvests to China in 2017, before the trade war began.

The tariffs led to a precipitous drop in U.S. soybean exports to China. From 2017 to 2018, they fell 70%.

It is not clear how Trump came to the conclusion that China footed the $28 billion bill for farmer subsidies. The payments were the handiwork of the USDA’s Commodity Credit Corporation, an agency that is authorized to borrow from the U.S. Treasury to stabilize America’s farm economy.

“President Trump has great affection for America’s farmers and ranchers. He knows that they’re fighting the fight and that they’re on the front lines,” Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue told reporters in 2018.

Farmers are viewed as a core constituency in Trump’s electoral base, and the president continues to hold commanding leads over Biden in 2020 polls of American farmers.

Observers have criticized Trump for using the little-known USDA mechanism to shield his administration from negative political consequences of the trade war, without having to put the measure before federal lawmakers.

“What’s unique about this is, [the subsidies] didn’t go through Congress,” Joe Glauber, the USDA’s former chief economist, told NPR in December 2019. “The sector that is hurt the most [agriculture], and which would normally complain, all of a sudden it’s assuaged by these payments.”

The Trump Administration’s approach has caught the attention of the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the U.S.’s watchdog agency. It’s investigating whether the payments were disproportionately distributed to large corporations or to places that supported Trump in the 2016 election.

Trade deal

The trade deal that the Trump administration signed with Beijing in January this year holds China to new purchasing targets in exchange for the lowering of tariffs. Officially, Chinese tariffs on U.S. goods remained in place, but in practice China granted tariff-free waivers on goods like pork and soybeans to Chinese importers.

As part of the deal, China agreed to purchase $36.6 billion worth of agricultural goods, a $12.5 billion increase from pre-trade war levels in 2017. On paper, that action by China provides real relief to American farmers. But through August, China had only purchased $11 billion worth of agricultural products, less than half of what it needed to buy to be on track to meet the conditions of the trade deal.

Meanwhile, from 2018 to 2020 U.S. farmers relied more heavily on U.S. government support. The share of income they receive from the U.S. government, as opposed to what they receive from selling their crops, has steadily increased in the last three years. So far in 2020, 40% of farmers’ net cash income has come from government subsidies, the highest percentage in two decades.

More must-read international coverage from Fortune:

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 Black Biz Daily News