Repurchase Cutbacks Identify the Weak… and the Poor

Standard & Poor’s just reported that third-quarter stock buybacks declined by almost 48% amongst S&P 500 firms. Cumulatively, that’s almost $156 billion less for the full year than 2007.

These repurchase cutbacks give us a window into who’s healthy – and who’s not. Companies that buy back shares have higher profits and generally outperform those that do not. Firms worried about income or financing are going to be the first ones to cut back or suspend share buybacks.

Surprisingly, the Information Technology sector accounts for 25% of all buybacks. While Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) took the top spot, energy companies only accounted for 18% of buybacks. That’s low, considering their record-breaking profits this year. Does this spell trouble for gas giants in 2009?

It was technology companies that dominated the top 10 spots. In the third quarter, they were led by: Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT), International Business Machines (NYSE: IBM), Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) and Hewlett Packard (NYSE: HPQ).

Apparently one of the worst economic environments in almost 70 years hasn’t really hurt these tech giants. It’s nothing like the dotcom fallout. And while tech spending is expected to slow next year – a 1.6% growth rate isn’t a decline.

Companies mentioned in this article: XOM, MSFT, IBM, INTC and HPQ.

Blackboard Archives

More on this topic (What's this?) Read more on Exxon Mobil at Wikinvest
Any investment contains risk. Please see our disclaimer


Related Investment U Articles:


What is Investment U?

Founded in 1999, Investment U publishes the free Investment U Daily newsletter, along with many other products designed to help investors make better decisions with their money.

Recent Articles

Investment U Weekly Update



Search Investment U:



What Readers Are Saying...

“Your Investment U letters are gradually taking effect on me. I’m less interested in goofy numbers, more interested in intelligent strategy. Thank you for a sane, even-handed vision of the political and financial environments.”
Helen H.

“Thanks for this newsletter. One of the best yet. Realistic, balanced, informative, not full of contradictions or sales pitches. Grateful for the honest approach (admitting not knowing everything about the subject, so we can make our own decisions). Wonderful stuff.”
Mike P.

Questions? Comments? Feedback?