IBJNews

WellPoint profit better than analyst estimates

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WellPoint Inc.’s profit slipped in the fourth-quarter but easily beat the expectations of Wall Street.

The Indianapolis-based health insurer earned $548.8 million, or $1.40 per share, in the three months ended Dec. 31. In the same quarter of 2009, WellPoint reported profit of $2.7 billion—of which $2.2 billion came from the one-time sale of its pharmacy subsidiary, NextRx.

Excluding that sale and other one-time charges, WellPoint’s profit fell 2 percent to $524.7 million from $536 million in the fourth quarter of 2009.

On that same basis, WellPoint earned $1.33 per share in the fourth-quarter, up from $1.16 in the same quarter a year before. Wall Street analysts were expecting $1.22, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.

WellPoint’s per-share profit increased sharply because the company has been buying back shares aggressively in the past year, reducing its common stock by nearly 15 percent.

Fourth-quarter revenue fell 23 percent to $14.65 billion absent the boost from the previous year's pharmacy sale. But even its operating revenue suffered, dropping 4 percent to $14.42 billion.

That still bested analysts’ average expectations of $14.27 billion.

For the year, WellPoint earned $2.9 billion in profit, or $6.94 per share, on revenue of $58.8 billion. The comapny expects 2011 profit to fall to $6.30 per share.

“We exceeded our goals in many areas of the company this year and provided a significant return of capital to our shareholders following the sale of NextRx," WellPoint CEO Angela Braly said in a prepared statement. “We also created a new strategy and implemented organizational changes that enhance our ability to provide affordable and valuable products to our customers and position us to be a long-run winner in the changing health care marketplace.”

WellPoint ended the year with 33.3 million people insured by its health plans, a drop of nearly 350,000 from a year ago. WellPoint’s insurance plan enrollment has been hurt by layoffs at its client companies.

However, in one encouraging development, the number of people covered by small- to mid-size employers, which WellPoint calls its local group, stopped sliding and actually increased in the fourth quarter by 45,000 people, to a total of 15.2 million.

WellPoint benefited from cost-conscious Americans deferring medical treatment, according to Bloomberg News, citing a trend that reduced expenses for all health insurers in the past two years. A slow start to the 2010-2011 flu season also led to lower use of care, the company said. The savings were limited because WellPoint was forced to accept lower rate increases than it proposed in California and the insurer’s commercial enrollment has declined, analyst Jason Gurda told Bloomberg.

“The whole managed-care group has been helped by low-cost trends, but WellPoint has benefited less than its peers” because of California and the falling enrollment, Gurda, an analyst with Boston-based Leerink Swann & Co., told Bloomberg before the results were released.

WellPoint shares rose 71 cents, or 1.2 percent, to $61.70 Tuesday in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The stock has dropped 4.6 percent since President Barack Obama signed the health overhaul into law on March 30.

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. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT