Editing Alpha Financial Markets Consulting plc
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Summary == | == Summary == | ||
Quoted on the London Stock Exchange, Alpha Financial Markets Consulting (FMC) is a company that's on a mission to help | Quoted on the London Stock Exchange, Alpha Financial Markets Consulting (FMC) is a company that's on a mission to help businesses maximise/improve their profits. The company's flagship offering is the provision of consultancy/advisory services. What makes the consultancy offering unique is that it's provided by the largest team of financial market industry experts. Evidence suggests that the provision of consultancy services by the largest financial market industry experts team enables financial market companies to make better business decisions, ultimately leading the companies to maximise/improve their profits. The expected return of an investment in Alpha FMC over the next five years is ccc%, according to the estimates of Proactive Investors, which equates to an annual return of ccc%. In other words, an £100,000 investment in the company is expected to return £cc in five years time. The degree of risk associated with an investment in Alpha FMC is <nowiki>''medium'</nowiki>, with the shares having an adjusted beta that is 14% above the market (1.14 vs. 1). Assuming that a suitable return level over five years is 10% per year, then an investment in the company is considered to be a 'suitable' one. | ||
=== Operations === | === Operations === | ||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
=== Financials === | === Financials === | ||
ccc | |||
=== Risks === | === Risks === | ||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
=== What's the mission of the company? === | === What's the mission of the company? === | ||
The mission of the company is to help businesses maximise their profits, in particular to be recognised as the leading global consultancy to the asset management, wealth management and insurance industries. | |||
=== What's the company's main offering(s)? === | === What's the company's main offering(s)? === | ||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
==== What's a key solution to the problem? ==== | ==== What's a key solution to the problem? ==== | ||
The solution is the provision of consultancy/advisory services. What makes the consultancy offering unique is that it's provided by the largest | The solution is the provision of consultancy/advisory services. What makes the consultancy offering unique is that it's provided by the largest team of financial market industry experts. Evidence suggests that the provision of consultancy services by the largest financial market industry experts team enables financial market companies to make better business decisions, ultimately leading the companies to maximise/improve their profits. | ||
Client service proposition | Client service proposition | ||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
Alpha Financial Markets Consulting | Alpha Financial Markets Consulting | ||
The group provides advice to its clients in the asset | The group provides advice to its clients in the asset and wealth management industry based on its sector experience and deep knowledge of the needs of specific industry participants. The group’s financial markets consulting proposition extends to working with clients across the four primary areas of: | ||
# Strategy and advisory | # Strategy and advisory | ||
Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
Projects classification | Projects classification | ||
Projects typically span multiple service lines and vary in size, duration and nature | Projects typically span multiple service lines and vary in size, duration and nature. The group undertakes projects across most of the asset and wealth management value chain and these fall into three categories: | ||
* | * Major programmes: these typically span more than one financial year, are multi-geography and would be valued in excess of £2 million. There are usually 2 to 5 major programmes running in any year. | ||
* | * Large programmes: these are typically up to a year in duration, single or multi regions and valued between £1 million and £2 million. There are circa 10 large programmes undertaken in a year. | ||
* | * Small programmes: these are typically single region, focused programmes valued at less than £1 million. There are usually more than 100 small programmes undertaken in a year. | ||
* The group principally prices its consulting services on a time and materials basis using daily charge out rates, but also uses fixed price contracts on occasions (typically in continental Europe). | |||
Client segments | Client segments | ||
Line 116: | Line 117: | ||
Asset Managers | Asset Managers | ||
The group has provided services to over 200 clients across the globe, including | The group has provided services to over 200 clients across the globe, including 17 of the 20 largest global asset managers by AUM and 60% of the top 50 as at 31 March 2017. In addition to traditional asset managers, Alpha also advises insurance-backed and pension-based businesses. The group’s clients cover the whole spectrum of institutional, intermediary and retail asset managers. | ||
Wealth Managers | Wealth Managers | ||
Line 134: | Line 135: | ||
Finally, Alpha supports a range of other providers to the asset and wealth management industry, including software vendors and data providers. Engagements with these clients include new product development, market reviews and support responding to market requests for proposal. | Finally, Alpha supports a range of other providers to the asset and wealth management industry, including software vendors and data providers. Engagements with these clients include new product development, market reviews and support responding to market requests for proposal. | ||
Key strengths of the group | Key strengths of the group | ||
Line 163: | Line 160: | ||
'''Strong balance sheet?''' | '''Strong balance sheet?''' | ||
=== Which are the main competitors of the product? === | === Which are the main competitors of the product? === | ||
A key way to determine an offering’s closest competitors is by looking at other offerings that are targeting the same or similar target audience (i.e. financial markets | A key way to determine an offering’s closest competitors is by looking at other offerings that are targeting the same or similar target audience (i.e. financial markets companies) and providing or aiming to provide the same core benefit (i.e. more/maximum business profits, in particular financial markets consultancy), and then ranking the offerings in terms of the total amount of time spent using and/or money spent purchasing the offerings. With that said, we view that the closest competitor of the Alpha FMC offering(s) is Accenture. A detailed comparison between Alpha FMC and its main competitors are shown in the table below. | ||
Alpha operates in a competitive global market and competes with several organisations that offer services similar to those offered by the group. Competitors include the advisory practices of major accounting firms, global consulting firms and boutique consulting businesses. | |||
Alpha operates in a competitive global market and competes with several organisations that offer services similar to those offered by the group. Competitors include the advisory practices of major accounting firms, global consulting firms and boutique consulting businesses. | |||
The group has been able to successfully compete against these firms by providing specialist expertise to the asset and wealth management industry, and by consistently delivering a high quality service which attracts repeat business and fosters long term relationships. Against the boutique consulting businesses, Alpha is able to differentiate itself through its global offering, relationships with the largest fund managers and reputation for high quality and efficient service. Against the global consulting firms, the group differentiates itself with a specialised industry offering and tailored client solutions. Alpha is able to set itself apart from the advisory practices of major accounting firms through its specialist sector focus and by deploying highly experienced industry consultants to client engagements, who have demonstrable track records of delivering complex projects. This is made possible through the group’s ability to attract and retain high calibre consultants. | The group has been able to successfully compete against these firms by providing specialist expertise to the asset and wealth management industry, and by consistently delivering a high quality service which attracts repeat business and fosters long term relationships. Against the boutique consulting businesses, Alpha is able to differentiate itself through its global offering, relationships with the largest fund managers and reputation for high quality and efficient service. Against the global consulting firms, the group differentiates itself with a specialised industry offering and tailored client solutions. Alpha is able to set itself apart from the advisory practices of major accounting firms through its specialist sector focus and by deploying highly experienced industry consultants to client engagements, who have demonstrable track records of delivering complex projects. This is made possible through the group’s ability to attract and retain high calibre consultants. | ||
How does Alpha's fees compare to its peers? What's the financial markets team size of the peers? | |||
=== What is the main way that the company expects to make money? === | === What is the main way that the company expects to make money? === | ||
=== What’s the size of the company target market? === | === What’s the size of the company target market? === | ||
===Total Addressable Market=== | ===Total Addressable Market=== | ||
Here, the total addressable market (TAM) is defined as the global | Here, the total addressable market (TAM) is defined as the global consultancy market, and based on a number of assumptions, it is estimated that the size of the market as of today (23rd January 2023), in terms of revenue, is $590 billion<ref>0.61% of global GDP.</ref>. | ||
===Serviceable Available Market=== | |||
The serviceable available market (SAM) is defined as the global asset management, wealth management and insurance consultancy market, and based on a number of assumptions, it is estimated that the size of the market as of today (23rd January 2023), in terms of revenue, is $59 billion<ref>=10% of the global consultancy market.</ref>. | |||
The asset and wealth management industry has grown significantly since 2008, with global aggregate assets under management standing at approximately $69.1 trillion at the end of 2016, compared to $38.5 trillion at the end of 2008. | |||
Whilst overall AUM is growing, the asset and wealth management industry is experiencing challenges stemming from regulatory changes and cost pressures from the regulators and end clients. These factors are driving an increased focus by asset and wealth managers on improving systems, data quality and operational processes, in order to gain a competitive advantage, generate above average returns and reduce costs. This in turn has helped drive demand for the management consulting services provided to the asset and wealth management industry, across the spectrum of front, middle and back office functions. | |||
The industry is subject to a wide range of regulatory and risk management considerations, which the directors believe will continue to drive growth in consulting services. In addition to the ever more demanding regulatory environment, the industry is having to react to requests from institutional and retail customers for greater transparency in reporting, engagement and accountability, which in turn is driving a growth in demand for more effective data systems and processes. | |||
The pressure on margins within the asset and wealth management industry has also resulted in significant consolidation in recent years, as fund managers seek to increase assets under management, drive synergies and ultimately generate better returns through mergers and acquisitions (“M&A”). | |||
The value of global M&A deals completed in the sector totalled approximately $34.9 billion in 2015 and $71.3 billion in 2016, with many market commentators expecting continued consolidation through M&A in the asset and wealth management industry in the near future. This has created substantial opportunities and areas of growth for Alpha as it continues to provide M&A integration, operational and outsourcing consultancy services to increasingly larger and more complex fund managers. | |||
===Serviceable Obtainable Market=== | |||
Here, the serviceable obtainable market (SOM) is defined as the United Kingdom asset management, wealth management and insurance consultancy market, and based on a number of assumptions, it is estimated that the size of the market as of today (23rd January 2023), in terms of revenue, is $2.17 billion<ref>= UK GDP x consultancy as a proportion of GDP x financial services as a proportion of GDP | |||
= $3.131 trillion x 0.84% x 8.3%.</ref>. | |||
=== What are the main achievements of the company? === | === What are the main achievements of the company? === | ||
Line 211: | Line 212: | ||
* The company has the largest dedicated team in the industry, with in excess of 900 consultants, globally. | * The company has the largest dedicated team in the industry, with in excess of 900 consultants, globally. | ||
* It operates from 16 client-facing offices, across the United Kingdom, North America, Europe and APAC. | * It operates from 16 client-facing offices, across the United Kingdom, North America, Europe and APAC. | ||
=== What's the business strategy of the company? === | === What's the business strategy of the company? === | ||
The group’s strategy is to continue to grow in both existing and new jurisdictions | The group’s strategy is to continue to grow in both existing and new jurisdictions. The group has a strong track record of EBITDA growth and intends to further grow its business in the following ways: | ||
'''Expand existing services in existing markets''' – The group currently serves clients in multiple countries and the directors consider that there is substantial scope to grow within these markets. In addition to winning new clients, the group also aims to grow by extending the services delivered to existing clients, or by serving other client group entities. | '''Expand existing services in existing markets''' – The group currently serves clients in multiple countries and the directors consider that there is substantial scope to grow within these markets. In addition to winning new clients, the group also aims to grow by extending the services delivered to existing clients, or by serving other client group entities. | ||
Line 226: | Line 229: | ||
=== Who are the key members of the team? === | === Who are the key members of the team? === | ||
The management team has a wealth of experience in the financial services | The management team has a wealth of experience in the financial services industry. | ||
==== Executive ==== | ==== Executive ==== | ||
Line 1,544: | Line 1,547: | ||
As with any investment, investing in Alpha FMC carries a level of risk. Overall, based on the Alpha FMC's adjusted beta (i.e. 1.139)<ref>Research shows that an investment has two main types of risks: 1) non-systematic and 2) systematic. Systematic risk is the risk related to the overall market, and non-systematic risk is the risk that's specific to an individual investment. Evidence shows that taking on non-systematic risk is inefficient, and it's, therefore, best to eliminate it; and in most cases, elimination is fairy easy to do [by holding a diversified portfolio of investments (i.e. around 15 investments)]. Accordingly, when assessing the riskiness of an investment, it’s best to look at the systematic risk only (i.e. ignore the non-systematic risk). A key measure of systematic risk is beta, and a main way to determine the riskiness of an investment is to compare the beta of the investment with the beta of the market, which is 1. For example, Supply@ME Capital's adjusted beta (5 years, monthly data) is 4.61, and is, accordingly, 561% above the market beta (of 1); assuming that a 'high' level of riskiness is 50% or more above the market beta, then the riskiness of investing in Supply@ME Captial is considered to be 'high' (561%>50%). For estimating an asset's beta, in terms of time period, and frequency of observations, the most common choice is five years of monthly data, yielding 60 observations. One study of U.S. stocks found support for five years of monthly data over alternatives. An argument can be made that the 2 years, weekly data can be especially appropriate in fast growing markets. The beta value in a future period has been found to be on average closer to the mean value of 1.0, the beta of an average-systematic-risk security, than to the value of the raw beta. Because valuation is forward looking, it is logical to adjust the raw beta so it more accurately predicts a future beta.</ref>, the degree of risk associated with an investment in Alpha FMC is 'medium'. | As with any investment, investing in Alpha FMC carries a level of risk. Overall, based on the Alpha FMC's adjusted beta (i.e. 1.139)<ref>Research shows that an investment has two main types of risks: 1) non-systematic and 2) systematic. Systematic risk is the risk related to the overall market, and non-systematic risk is the risk that's specific to an individual investment. Evidence shows that taking on non-systematic risk is inefficient, and it's, therefore, best to eliminate it; and in most cases, elimination is fairy easy to do [by holding a diversified portfolio of investments (i.e. around 15 investments)]. Accordingly, when assessing the riskiness of an investment, it’s best to look at the systematic risk only (i.e. ignore the non-systematic risk). A key measure of systematic risk is beta, and a main way to determine the riskiness of an investment is to compare the beta of the investment with the beta of the market, which is 1. For example, Supply@ME Capital's adjusted beta (5 years, monthly data) is 4.61, and is, accordingly, 561% above the market beta (of 1); assuming that a 'high' level of riskiness is 50% or more above the market beta, then the riskiness of investing in Supply@ME Captial is considered to be 'high' (561%>50%). For estimating an asset's beta, in terms of time period, and frequency of observations, the most common choice is five years of monthly data, yielding 60 observations. One study of U.S. stocks found support for five years of monthly data over alternatives. An argument can be made that the 2 years, weekly data can be especially appropriate in fast growing markets. The beta value in a future period has been found to be on average closer to the mean value of 1.0, the beta of an average-systematic-risk security, than to the value of the raw beta. Because valuation is forward looking, it is logical to adjust the raw beta so it more accurately predicts a future beta.</ref>, the degree of risk associated with an investment in Alpha FMC is 'medium'. | ||
Here, to estimate the adjusted beta, we used the iShares MSCI World ETF to represent the market portfolio; and in terms of the time period and frequency of observations, we used five years of monthly data (i.e. 60 observations in total), which is supported by a study and is the most common choice. The beta value in a future period has been found to be on average closer to the mean value of 1.0, and because valuation is forward-looking, it is logical to adjust the raw beta so it more/most accurately predicts a future beta. In addition, here, we have assumed that for an investment to be considered 'medium' risk, it must have a beta value of between 0.5 and 1.5. Further information about the beta ratings can be found in the appendix section of this report. | Here, to estimate the adjusted beta, we used the iShares MSCI World ETF to represent the market portfolio; and in terms of the time period and frequency of observations, we used five years of monthly data (i.e. 60 observations in total), which is supported by a study and is the most common choice. We note that the company in its current state was only really formed (following a reverse takeover) on 27th March 2020<ref>Officially, the company was formed on 1st March 2000 (i.e. almost 23 years ago).</ref>, and, therefore, the numbers of available data observations is less than what's typically used in the five years of monthly data beta calculation (i.e. 33 observations vs. 60 observations). The beta value in a future period has been found to be on average closer to the mean value of 1.0, and because valuation is forward-looking, it is logical to adjust the raw beta so it more/most accurately predicts a future beta. In addition, here, we have assumed that for an investment to be considered 'medium' risk, it must have a beta value of between 0.5 and 1.5. Further information about the beta ratings can be found in the appendix section of this report. | ||
The key risks can be found below. For us, currently, the biggest risk to the valuation of the company relates to the company's ability (and willingness) to take the appropriate risk to maintain the growth of the business. | The key risks can be found below. For us, currently, the biggest risk to the valuation of the company relates to the company's ability (and willingness) to take the appropriate risk to maintain the growth of the business. | ||
Line 1,783: | Line 1,786: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Risk-free rate (%) | |Risk-free rate (%) | ||
|3. | |3.488% | ||
|Here, the risk free rate is the US 30 year treasury bond, and is calculated as at | |Here, the risk free rate is the US 30 year treasury bond, and is calculated as at 16th December 2022. Research suggests that for the risk-free rate, it's best to use one that has the same or similar maturity to the estimated remaining lifespan of the company. Here, we have assumed that the estimated lifespan of the company is 50 years, so we have used the longest maturity, which is 30 years. | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Beta | |Beta | ||
Line 1,791: | Line 1,794: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Equity risk premium (%) | |Equity risk premium (%) | ||
| | |5.26 | ||
|Research suggests that for the region of equity risk premium, it's best to use one that is the same or similar to the region of the beta market portfolio. Here, the region of the beta market portfolio is the world/global, so we have used the world/global region for the equity risk premium | |Here, the equity risk premium is in relation to the global region, and is calculated as at 1st January 2022. Research suggests that for the region of equity risk premium, it's best to use one that is the same or similar to the region of the beta market portfolio. Here, the region of the beta market portfolio is the world/global, so we have used the world/global region for the equity risk premium. | ||
|- | |- | ||
|Cost of equity (%) | |Cost of equity (%) | ||
| | |9.479% | ||
|Cost of equity = Risk-free rate + Beta x Equity risk premium. | |Cost of equity = Risk-free rate + Beta x Equity risk premium. | ||
|} | |} | ||
Line 1,819: | Line 1,822: | ||
|Which type of multiple do you want to use? | |Which type of multiple do you want to use? | ||
|Price/earnings to growth | |Price/earnings to growth | ||
| | |Given the relatively low amount of leverage used in consulting businesses and Alpha's significant amount of (positive) earnings and comparatively high amount of recurring revenue, we suggest valuing the company using the price/earnings ratio. However, we feel that to take into account the different business lifecycle stages of its peers (and, therefore, the different growth stages of its peers), the most suitable valuation multiple to use is the price/earnings to growth multiple (or the PEG multiple, for short), rather than the price/earnings multiple. | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In regards to the PEG multiple, for the earnings figure, which year to you want to use? | |In regards to the PEG multiple, for the earnings figure, which year to you want to use? | ||
|Year 1 | |Year 1 | ||
|Research suggests that when using the relative valuation approach, it's best to use a time period of 12 months or less. Accordingly, for the | |Research suggests that when using the relative valuation approach, it's best to use a time period of 12 months or less. Accordingly, for the sales figure, we suggest using Year 1, which is 20 pence per share. | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In regards to the PEG multiple, for the earnings growth figure, which year(s) do you want to use? | |In regards to the PEG multiple, for the earnings growth figure, which year(s) do you want to use? | ||
|Year 2 to 4, from now | |Year 2 to 4, from now | ||
|We suggest that for the | |We suggest that for the sales growth figure, it's best to use Year 2 to 4, which equates to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 30%. | ||
|- | |- | ||
|In regards to the PEG multiple, what multiple figure do you want to use? | |In regards to the PEG multiple, what multiple figure do you want to use? | ||
Line 1,847: | Line 1,850: | ||
|} | |} | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
Line 1,890: | Line 1,858: | ||
!Primary exchange | !Primary exchange | ||
!Adjusted EV/sales | !Adjusted EV/sales | ||
! | ! | ||
! | ! | ||
! | ! | ||
!Sales growth rate | !Sales growth rate | ||
!Adjusted beta | !Adjusted beta |