Why I’d avoid McCarthy & Stone plc after 10% drop and buy this stock instead

Roland Head explains why McCarthy & Stone plc (LON:MCS) has slumped and reveals the housebuilder he owns.

| More on:

The content of this article was relevant at the time of publishing. Circumstances change continuously and caution should therefore be exercised when relying upon any content contained within this article.

You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources, and more. Learn More.

RISK WARNING: should you invest, the value of your investment may rise or fall and your capital is at risk. Before investing, your individual circumstances should be assessed. Consider taking independent financial advice. The Motley Fool believes in building wealth through long-term investing and so we do not promote or encourage high-risk activities including day trading, CFDs, spread betting, cryptocurrencies, and forex. Where we promote an affiliate partner’s brokerage products, these are focused on the trading of readily releasable securities.

Shares of retirement home builder McCarthy & Stone (LSE: MCS) fell by up to 15% this morning.

The shares slumped after the developer warned investors that its 2017/18 profits could fall significantly if it fails to win exemption from a government plan to reduce ground rents on new long leases to zero.

A hidden weakness

This summer saw a scandal emerge relating to new-build homes being sold under leasehold agreements. Doing this enabled housebuilders to boost their profits by selling the freehold separately to a third-party investor. In some cases the ground rents charged to homeowners have risen rapidly after an initial period.

Of course, flats are usually sold leasehold, so buyers of McCarthy & Stone properties are unlikely to have questioned this aspect of their purchase. The problem is that the company appears to have become dependent on the profits it makes from selling freehold reversions.

Analysts expect the company to generate a profit of £89m in 2017/18. In this morning’s statement, it said that it expected to make a profit of £33m from the sale of freehold reversions. If the ban on ground rents goes ahead, I believe the group’s profits could fall sharply.

My view

McCarthy & Stone believes retirement properties should be exempt from the ground rent ban. But in my opinion such developments are no different to regular apartment complexes, which also require centralised maintenance and services.

I’m not convinced that the firm will win its plea for exemption. In my opinion, today’s news simply highlights this group’s weak underlying profitability.

Today’s fall follows the slump seen in September, when management warned that profit margins would be hit this year by higher levels of incentives. These appear to include paying buyers’ electricity bills and service charges for several years.

Offers like this have supported higher sale prices. This supports revenue growth, but doesn’t disguise the reality that the group’s 2016/17 return on capital employed (ROCE) was just 12.5%, well below the housing sector average.

In my view, these shares are best avoided. I believe there are better opportunities elsewhere.

My personal pick

My top choice among housebuilders is FTSE 250 group Redrow (LSE: RDW), a share that I own myself.

Redrow has reportedly already stopped selling leasehold homes. So the firm’s future profitability shouldn’t be affected by yesterday’s ban. There are a number of other things I like about this stock that’s led me to favour it over some rivals.

The first is that the firm remains under the chairmanship of founder Steve Morgan, who owns a 25% stake that’s worth around £600m at current prices. I believe Mr Morgan’s interests should be well aligned with those of shareholders.

Although the group’s dividend yield of 3.4% is fairly average, this payout is expected to be covered 3.5 times by earnings this year. This should reduce the risk of a dividend cut if markets stumble.

Redrow’s ROCE has increased every year since 2012 and reached 21% last year. That’s nearly double McCarthy’s figure of 12.5%. Despite this, the firm’s shares trade on a forecast P/E of 8.3 and a price/book value of 1.9. That’s cheaper than several comparable rivals.

I continue to hold Redrow and believe further gains are possible in 2018.

RISK WARNING: should you invest, the value of your investment may rise or fall and your capital is at risk. Before investing, your individual circumstances should be assessed. Consider taking independent financial advice. The Motley Fool believes in building wealth through long-term investing and so we do not promote or encourage high-risk activities including day trading, CFDs, spread betting, cryptocurrencies, and forex. Where we promote an affiliate partner’s brokerage products, these are focused on the trading of readily releasable securities.

Roland Head owns shares of Redrow. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Redrow. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.

More on Investing Articles

Investing Articles

Publish Test

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut…

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP P-Press Update Test

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP Test as Author

Test content.

Read more »

Investing Articles

KM Test Post 2

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP Test PP Status

Test content. Test headline

Read more »

Investing Articles

KM Test Post

This is my content.

Read more »

Investing Articles

JP Tag Test

Read more »

Investing Articles

Testing testing one two three

Sample paragraph here, testing, test duplicate

Read more »