Nestle February 18, 2021
CH 003 886 335 0
Nestle NESN.VX is the worlds biggest food company with revenues of 84 bn CHF (2020) covering plenty of fields of food products spread very even over the whole globe. Nestle is a very profitable company with a net profit 12.2 bn CHF 2020.
A motivation to buy Nestle is the slow but steady growing business. It is a share for retirement.
This is not a recommendation or proposal to do anything. It is my private personal opinion. I`m not independing as I own a position of Nestle shares and I was working for Nestle many years till more than a decade ago. The information below are best guesses it is not guaranteed.
Chances & Risks
It seems that the corona panic has a minor effect on Nestlé. Food stores are kept open in most countries. Many poeple eat more at home rather than visiting restaurants. Putting these effects in consideration the 2020 was weaker than expected. The sale of the skin care division, Herta, US Ice Cream plus lower exchange rates caused a loss of 9% revenues vs. 2019.
Nestle is compared to similar companies with a profit/share of perhaps 4.29 CHF equivalent to a PE of 23 (100 CHF) expensive. The dividend yield of 2.7% is above the yield of CHF bonds below that of other FMCG companies..
Nestle achieves a RIG of 2 - 3% per year. The organic growth depends partly on inflation. If the crazy economy with excessive money printing will go on inflation will rise to levels unseen in the last decades. Then OG will increase in a higher pace letting the Nestle share much more beautiful.
In 2020 Nestlé achieved a trading operating profit margin of 17.7%. This seems to me not sustainable in the food business. In this field there are plenty of producers that produce private labels and accept very low margins producing it for retailers. A margin of 17.7% means either an excessiv pricing with the risk to loose a lot of sales and at the end the place in the shelve and/or to minimize investment in the brands. Both are risks in the long run. It seems likely that Nestlé has to reset its margin targets sooner or later.
The high dividend plus the buyback program added to a shareholder return of 14.5 bn CHF 2020 far above the free cash flow of 10.2 bn CHF increasing net debt to 31 bn CHF. This is by no means sustainable. Brands are expensive to be build up or to buy (see Starbucks) but for far less to maintain. If brands are not maintained well brands are loosing their value. From the business logic it would be preferable for Nestle to cut the share holder return by half and to invest more in the brands. I assume that the Nestle management is not strong enough to resist activist shareholders.
Nestle is a company to stay in for retirement. The strong brands and cash flow, a regional well balanced business, the FMCG as such make it one of the most stable company of the world. I assume that Nestle will grow organic in the next couple of years with 1-3% in CHF.
Nestle communicates more honest and decisions are driven more by logic than that of other big FMCG companies.
The main risk of Nestle is its tendency to beaucracy, complex structures and overhead. Nestle acts slower compared to smaller sized, leaner European companies as Müller Milch, Hipp or Krueger. Nestle gave up plenty of brands and products as these brands were passed by smaller more agile competitors. In developing countries Nestle profits from its superior know how, the transfer of products and brands in these markets.
The big Nestlé R&D centers are successful in optimizing taxes but usually seem to act somewhere far away from reality. Successful new products were developed by coincidence only if at all. As a result Nestle has to buy in successful brands as Starbucks coffee to renew the portfoilio. Successful brands are very expensive. Some 14 years ago Nestle implemented an ERP program that pressed the whole company in very rigid unflexible structures.
Some activist shareholders are pressing the company to increase profitability increasing margins further selling its Loreal(1) share. This initiative is not really helpful. It may press the management to look for short term profitability but does not help in the long run. The poeple keep their food preferences from their youth during lifetime. Thus it makes sense to develop brands for a long term success.
All in all Nestle needs to find structures that allows to improve agility and flexibility and get rid of the big overhead. During the Maucher era in the 90ies Nestle was less centralized. The countries and divisions had plenty of room for decision. The group was directed by an informal Swiss expat network.
Number of shares registered 2’881 M, outstanding: 2816.5 M Dec. 31, 2020.
Share buyback: 2020 - 22 of 20bn started.
Nestle bought a share of the Independent Vetcare Group that operates 1100 animal clinics in Europe and the Middle East. It makes sense as the doctors have a high reputation and if they recommend Nestle Pet food it might increase the revenues of this division significantly(5).
The business of Nestle is very well balanced over the whole planet. It covers many food brands. That gives Nestle the highest stability of nearly all companies of the world.
Within the last decades Europe lost its dominant share in favor to North and South America.
Nestle is diversified as well in product groups
Source: Nestle Full Year 2020
Data from Market Screener (2)
|Nestlé SA||93 053 584||3,04%|
|The Vanguard Group, Inc.||82 039 186||2,68%|
|Norges Bank Investment Management||74 743 612||2,44%|
|UBS AG (Investment Management)||49 377 646||1,61%|
|Capital Research & Management Co. (World Investors)||46 106 955||1,51%|
|Capital Research & Management Co. (Global Investors)||42 075 931||1,37%|
|BlackRock Fund Advisors||41 668 324||1,36%|
|Third Point LLC||40 000 000||1,31%|
|Massachusetts Financial Services Co.||30 989 560||1,01%|
|Zürcher Kantonalbank (Investment Management)||28 706 688||0,94%|
The most important holding of Nestle is the 23% stake (129881021 shares) in Loreal. In dec. 31st 2020 43.7 bn CHF.
The Group holds 129 881 021 shares in L’Oréal (whose ultimate parent company is domiciled in France), the world leader in cosmetics.
Consumer Good Companies
In boom times consumer good companies increase their revenues as more poeple buy branded products but earn less when raw materials, labour and nearly all costs are rising. In recessions it is the other way. Revenues are decreasing slightly but profits are increasing significantly. In the business figures these effects are straightened. For ex. when profits are not satisfying depreciations are done at a minimum. When profits are rising manager remember plants, molds..and other stuff to write it off.
(7) 2019 October 18 https://www.handelszeitung.ch/unternehmen/nestle-auf-wachstumskurs-20-milliarden-fur-aktionare?utm_source=Handelszeitung+Newsletter&utm_campaign=1cb5cfbd21-LUNCH_TOPICS_2019_10_17&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c1505081ea-1cb5cfbd21-92780129
(5) 2019 April 09 ttps://www.handelszeitung.ch/unternehmen/nestle-kooperiert-mit-britischer-tierklinik-gruppe?utm_source=Handelszeitung+Newsletter&utm_campaign=95587210e3-LUNCH_TOPICS_2018_12_03_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c1505081ea-95587210e3-92780129
(4) 2019 Feb 19 https://www.nestle.com/asset-library/Documents/Library/Presentations/Sales_and_Results/2018-full-year-results-investor-presentation.pdf
(3) 2019 feb. 14 https://www.nestle.com/asset-library/documents/library/presentations/sales_and_results/2018-full-year-results-press-conference-presentation.pdf
Nestle investor relations.
Urheberrechtsverletzungen / Verletzung von Schutzrechten
Sollten Sie auf dieser Webseite Inhalte finden, in denen Sie möglicherweise Ihre Schutzrechte verletzt sehen, dann wenden Sie sich bitte umgehend an mich. Senden Sie mir eine E-Post an email@example.com und ich werde umgehend die verletzten Marken- oder Urheberrechte entfernen. Es ist nicht mein Ansinnen Urheberrechte und/oder Schutzrechte zu verletzen.
Eine anwaltliche Abmahnung zur Beanstandung der Schutzrechtsverletzung ist nicht notwendig und die damit verbundenen Kosten werden nicht erstattet. Auf Grund der zuvor gemachten Zusage besteht keine Veranlassung, mit Hilfe eines Anwalts die Verletzung fremder Rechte zu rügen. Es fehlt an einem entsprechenden Rechtsschutzbedürfnis. Sollte dennoch ohne vorherige Kontaktaufnahme eine anwaltliche Abmahnung erfolgen, haben Sie die damit verbundenen Kosten allein zu tragen.