Investing In Central Utility Stocks: Do Today’s Valuations Make Sense?

 | Aug 07, 2012 01:00AM ET

This is the third in my series on investing in utility stocks based on the sector’s current valuation levels. The series was initially inspired by concerns that utility stocks may be overvalued because they had recently performed very well. When the series first started with ITC Holdings Corp: Only Investor-Owned Transmission Utility
ITC Holdings Corp. (NYSE: ITC) is the nation's largest independent electric transmission company. Based in Novi, Michigan, ITC invests in the electric transmission grid to improve reliability, expand access to markets, lower the overall cost of delivered energy and allow new generating resources to interconnect to its transmission systems. ITC's regulated operating subsidiaries include ITCTransmission, Michigan Electric Transmission Company, ITC Midwest and ITC Great Plains.

Through these subsidiaries, ITC owns and operates high-voltage transmission facilities in Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma, serving a combined peak load exceeding 26,000 megawatts along 15,000 circuit miles of transmission line. Through ITC Grid Development and its subsidiaries, the company also focuses on expansion in areas where significant transmission system improvements are needed.

Electric transmission is getting more focus and attention as a concept of an electronic grid analogous to the Internet. Currently there is only one investor-owned utility that is solely invested in transmission; ITC Holdings.

The company was formed in 2002 when it acquired the transmission assets of DTE Energy. The company continues to buy the transmission assets from other utilities and is also building its own projects. ITC went public in July of 2005.

I look at this company separately because not only is it unique within the electric utility industry, but the investment dynamics underpinning this company are unique as well. However, notice that the 60.8% earnings growth rate is skewed due to anomalous earnings growth from 2004 to 2005.

This is a classic example of how statistics can be misleading. Moreover, we further see an example of where the normal PE ratio is more meaningful than the orange earnings justified valuation line, again, due to the skewed growth rate.