Comparing Free Cash Flow per Share (FCF/share) to Earnings Per Share (EPS): Using Divergence to Detect Red Flags

When evaluating a company’s financial health, investors often rely on a variety of metrics to assess its performance. Among the most commonly scrutinized are Earnings Per Share (EPS) and Free Cash Flow per Share (FCF/share). While both are important in their own right, comparing these two figures can provide deeper insights into a company's actual financial condition. A divergence between EPS and FCF/share may signal potential issues that warrant further investigation. This article explores why and how the divergence between these two metrics can be used as a red flag for investors.

What is Earnings Per Share (EPS)?

Earnings Per Share (EPS) is a widely used financial metric that reflects a company’s profitability on a per-share basis. It is calculated as:

EPS=Net?Income\Shares?Outstanding

EPS indicates how much profit is attributable to each outstanding share of a company's common stock. While it is an important tool for assessing profitability, EPS is an accounting-based measure and can be influenced by non-cash items such as depreciation, amortization, and one-off adjustments, which may not provide an accurate picture of the company’s true cash generation.

What is Free Cash Flow per Share (FCF/share)?

Free Cash Flow per Share (FCF/share) represents the cash a company generates after covering its operating expenses and capital expenditures, on a per-share basis. It is calculated as:

FCF/share=Free?Cash?Flow\Shares?Outstanding

Free Cash Flow (FCF) is the cash remaining after a company has made investments in its operations (capital expenditures) and is available to be returned to shareholders, reinvested in the business, or used to pay down debt. Unlike EPS, FCF/share provides a clearer view of a company’s cash-generating ability and financial flexibility, as it reflects the company’s capacity to support dividends, debt repayments, and growth without relying on external financing.

Divergence Between FCF/share and EPS: A Potential Red Flag

While EPS and FCF/share are both important metrics, they often move in different directions because they are calculated based on different factors. A significant divergence between EPS and FCF/share should raise concerns, as it could suggest potential issues with a company’s cash flow, management, or accounting practices. Here are some of the main reasons why such a divergence might occur:

1. Earnings Manipulation or Accounting Adjustments

EPS is an accounting measure and can be influenced by various non-cash items or accounting choices, such as depreciation, amortization, and one-time gains. For example, a company might report strong EPS by recognizing revenue from long-term contracts, or by recording a gain from selling an asset, even though those transactions do not result in actual cash inflows. In contrast, Free Cash Flow represents the actual cash generated from core business activities and is not subject to these accounting manipulations.

If a company reports strong EPS but its FCF/share is weak or negative, this may signal that the reported profits are being inflated by accounting adjustments rather than being driven by real cash flow. In such cases, FCF/share offers a more reliable indicator of the company’s financial health.

2. Heavy Capital Expenditures (CapEx)

A divergence between EPS and FCF/share can also arise when a company is investing heavily in capital expenditures (CapEx) to expand its operations or infrastructure. For instance, a company might report strong EPS due to solid revenues, but if it is investing heavily in new projects, its free cash flow could be low or negative. This is particularly common in capital-intensive industries like telecommunications, utilities, or technology.

While high CapEx is often necessary for long-term growth, it can limit short-term cash flow. If a company is generating strong profits (via EPS) but lacks free cash flow to support growth or dividends, it may indicate that it is using its earnings to finance future growth rather than returning value to shareholders in the form of dividends or share buybacks.

3. Non-Operating Income or Unusual Items

EPS can also be influenced by non-operating income or one-time items, such as the sale of assets, investment gains, or tax benefits. These items may boost EPS temporarily but do not contribute to the company’s ongoing cash flow. For example, a company might report large gains from selling a building or other assets, which would boost EPS but have no direct impact on future cash flows.

On the other hand, Free Cash Flow reflects only the operational cash generation of the business, excluding these non-recurring events. If a company reports strong EPS due to one-time events but its FCF/share is weak, it suggests that the underlying business operations are not as profitable or sustainable as the EPS figure would imply.

4. Debt Financing and Interest Payments

Another common reason for a divergence between EPS and FCF/share is debt financing. Companies that are heavily reliant on debt may report strong EPS due to interest tax shields, but their ability to generate cash could be compromised by the need to service high interest payments.

While EPS includes interest expenses in the income statement, FCF/share accounts for all cash outflows, including debt servicing costs. If a company has high debt levels and significant interest expenses, it may show strong profits on the income statement (via EPS) but struggle with negative or low Free Cash Flow, signaling liquidity problems.

5. Growth Versus Profitability

In growth-oriented companies, it is common to see a temporary divergence between EPS and FCF/share. Growth companies, particularly in the tech, biotech, or energy sectors, often reinvest heavily in their operations, which can result in low or negative Free Cash Flow in the short term. In these cases, EPS may be more favorable, reflecting the company’s revenue growth and profitability, while FCF/share lags behind due to significant investments in future growth.

However, if the divergence persists without a clear path to improved cash flow, it may suggest that the company is struggling to translate growth into profitability or cash generation. This could be a red flag for investors, especially if there is uncertainty around whether the company’s growth strategy will eventually lead to sustainable free cash flow.

Why the Divergence is a Red Flag

A significant and persistent divergence between EPS and FCF/share signals that there may be a disconnect between a company’s reported profitability and its ability to generate real cash. This can indicate several potential risks:

• Liquidity Issues: The company may not have enough cash to support day-to-day operations, making it vulnerable to financial distress, further borrowing, or dilution.
• Sustainability Concerns: If a company’s reported profits are primarily driven by non-cash items or accounting adjustments, its long-term profitability may not be sustainable.
• Management Concerns: A persistent divergence may suggest that management is focusing more on boosting EPS through accounting maneuvers or financial engineering rather than focusing on sustainable cash generation and long-term shareholder value.

Investors should be particularly cautious when a company reports high EPS but low or negative Free Cash Flow. This may suggest that the company’s reported profitability is not as robust as it seems, and it could be hiding underlying cash flow problems that may eventually affect its operations and stock price.

Conclusion

In summary, while Earnings Per Share (EPS) is a widely used metric for assessing profitability, Free Cash Flow per Share (FCF/share) offers a clearer and more reliable picture of a company’s ability to generate cash and support its operations. When there is a divergence between these two metrics, it can act as a red flag, signaling that the company may not be as financially healthy as its reported profits suggest.

By focusing on both EPS and FCF/share, investors can gain a more comprehensive understanding of a company’s true financial performance. A consistent divergence between these metrics should prompt investors to dig deeper, examining the reasons behind the gap and considering whether the company’s business model, management practices, or accounting choices are contributing to potential risks. This approach helps investors avoid potential pitfalls and make more informed decisions, ensuring they are not misled by inflated earnings figures.

?