IBJNews

Analyst cuts Cummins rating, citing rise in shares

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Jefferies & Co., citing the rapid ascent in price for a share of Cummins Inc., downgraded the Indiana-based engine maker's stock Friday.

Analyst Stephen Volkmann lowered his rating on the engine maker's stock to "Hold" from "Buy," noting that the shares have risen 30 percent from their October lows and are now just 10 percent below all-time highs.

Given the continued weakness in many of the markets Cummins serves, it's possible that the company's initial guidance for 2013 could come in below current average Wall Street predictions, Volkmann said.

In October, Cummins saw its third-quarter profits tumble 22 percent because of a lack of demand for commercial engines. The company it was reducing its work force by between 1,000 and 1,500 people.

Like other manufacturers, Cummins is getting hit overseas, namely in Europe, because of a widening recession and unemployment rates of around 25 percent. Companies like Ford Motor Co. closed major facilities in Europe last year and on Friday, Honda said it would cut about one in four jobs at its UK factory as it struggles with low demand.

But the U.S. is experiencing a steady recovery.

"We do see potential upside in 2013 if growth reaccelerates later in the year, particularly in North America truck and emerging markets," Volkmann wrote. He cut his 2013 profit prediction for Cummins by 50 cents to $8.75. Analysts, on average, expect a profit of $9 per share, according to FactSet.

However, Cummins apparently sees its shares as undervalued. The company, based in Columbus, approved the purchase of up to $1 billion in its own stock last month.

Shares fell 1.6 percent, or $1.83, to close at $110.61 each Friday. Over the past 52 weeks, the company's shares have traded between $82.20 and $129.51.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT