FANG Exposed - Part 1

Jim Crammer coined the acronym FANG for Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google (now Alphabet) and many follow these stocks for gains when the rest of the market stalls. I find it funny when these companies are similar but there financials are different. So let's take some fundamental numbers of them and you tell me which one makes sense based on the numbers to invest:

	A	B	C	D
Earnings Per Share	6.8143	37.2373	6.3429	2.3755
Price to Earnings Ratio	30.95	32.52	284.1	152.67
PE/Growth	1.34	1.89	13.15	2.78
Institutional Ownership	71%	78%	56%	77%
Gross Profit Margin	86.04%	57.41%	37.77.%	38.13.%
Long-Term Debt to Equity	0	2.46	120.59	185.52
Return on Assets	25.54%	13.39%	3.04%	5.46%
Return on Equity	28.79%	16.84%	11.86%	28.09%

Tune in tomorrow to find out which is which, but which one would you invest your money into?

To me, A is the winner with B closely behind. I remember Crammer mentioning that he likes companies with a PEG (Price to Earnings Growth) over 2, but his favorite company Apple is below that. I feel that a number below 2 might be better because if your PE ratio is overextended, it doesn't matter what your growth number is because your PEG will still be high.

When I was in school, I was told that you want companies that have a PE ratio below 10. These days those only exist in high dividend companies that don't have growth. Dividend are great, but growth is how you build wealth. Therefore PE ratio along with the Institutional Ownership would eliminate number 3.

The bottom numbers are interesting and exciting. Company A has no long term debt where company C and D appear to be leveraged heavily. Would Company C and D be in this group if they didn't have so much debt?

If you take out the first line, Company A beats the rest of FANG. Ultimately you invest in shares of companies to share their earning power, so Earnings Per Share puts Company B far ahead of the rest.

Based on these numbers, which one would you take?